Distribution of Turkic languages. The degree of study of the problem and the historical prerequisites for the penetration of Turkic vocabulary into the Russian language Recommended list of dissertations

Common lexical elements of Turkic and Armenian, Greek and Latin languages.

If we talk about the Turkic-Indo-European lexical correspondences, then in many respects this area of ​​linguistics is still largely unexplored. The results of studies carried out by the graphic-analytical method allow us to look at the relationship between the Indo-European and Turkic languages ​​from a new angle. The work proposed here is only the first step of such an approach, and, of course, some part of the given Turkic-Indo-European correspondences is accidental. But the author considered it his duty to cite doubtful cases as well, for it is better to take into consideration all the possibilities than to immediately discard something interesting or even important. Over time, when there are other explanations for individual correspondences, they will be excluded from the list. It should be borne in mind that the list was compiled only to confirm the European ancestral home of the Turks and is not an etymological guide. Unfortunately, there are quite a lot of such "critics" who, having seen one or two erroneous cases, immediately cross out the entire list. This is the logic of the "Stone Age", but, oddly enough, is quite widespread in our time.

Undoubtedly, in the Turkic and Indo-European languages ​​there is a certain number of roots that can be attributed to those times when the ancient ancestors of the Turks and Indo-Europeans inhabited neighboring areas in the interfluve of the Kura and Araks in Transcaucasia.

Contacts between the ancient Turks and the ancient Indo-Europeans continued after the migration of both ethnic groups from Transcaucasia to Eastern Europe. The closest neighbors of the Turks in Eastern Europe were the proto-Armenians. Accordingly, quite a lot of words of Turkic origin were found in the Armenian language, although, obviously, not all of them. Through the ancient Armenian part of the Turkic words even got into the ancient Greek. Below are the Turkisms in the Armenian language, which sometimes have correspondences in Greek and Latin.

arm. altiur“damp lowland, meadow, swamp” - Tur., Tat., Karach., Balk. alt"bottom", "lower", etc.

arm. asu"channel" - rasp. Turk. aryk"ditch".

arm. acux"coal" - sp. Turk. o:ž "ak"furnace" (Chuv. vucax, tour. okak etc.), in addition, Turkmen. cog, tour. Sovg, Kaz. sok, Uzbek čůg hot coals, etc.

arm. alap' aŕnem"rob" - Chuv. ulap“giant”, D. Turk. alp, tat alyp and others “hero, hero”, tour. alp"hero", "brave".

arm. alik'“wave”, “shaft” (another meaning is “gray beard, gray hair”, Gyubshman connects both meanings, which is unconvincing), gr. αλοζ “furrow” – Tur. oluk, eider. xolluk, Chuv. valak“chute” Karach., Balk. uuaq"wavy".

arm. antas"forest" - eider. andyz“shrub, grove”, tour. andIz"elecampane". There are also similar words in other Turkic languages, but they all mean different plants. Only in Armenian and Gagauz do they mean "forest".

arm. atkhi"leg" - Society. Turk. ajaq/adaq"leg".

arm. garš-i-m“disdain, abhor” - Turkm. garsy, eider. karsy, tour. karsi, Chuv. xirs"against".

arm. gjul"village" - gag. kuu"village"

arm. gor"lamb" - rasp. Turk. gozy/qozy"lamb".

arm. helg"lazy" - Society. Turk. jalta/jalka“lazy” (Karach, Balk. jalk, Chuv. julxav, tat. jalkau, Kaz. žalkau and etc.)

arm. ji, gr. ιπποσ “horse”, lat. equa, rum. iapa"Mare" - Society. Turk. jaby, jabu"horse", Turkm. jaby, Chuv. jupax. In Armenian, in the intervocalic position, the sound R disappears. Hubschman connects the arm. word with skr. haya“horse”, phonetically distant.

arm. kamar"vault", gr. καμαρα “vaulted room”, lat. camurus"twisted, vaulted", camerare"form a vault" - tour. kubur“case, trumpet”, Uzbek. dial. qumur, Kaz. dial. quvyr"chimney" Obviously Turkish words are derived from kopur“bridge” (see below).

arm. kamurj'"bridge", gr. γαφυρα "dam, bridge" - commonly. Turk. kopur"bridge" (ch. keper, Karach., Balk. kopur, tat. kuper and etc.). Sir Gerard Clawson suggests the origin of the Turkic word from the root kop-"foam, boil", which is completely unconvincing. Perhaps, Armenian, Greek and other Indo-European words with the meaning “goat” (lat. caper, Celt. caer, gabor etc.) Later, in some Germanic languages, words appeared with a meaning close to the meaning of the bridge, but already a borrowing from Latin (goal. keper, German Kapfer beam head, etc.)

arm. sta-na-m"to buy" - Chuv. sut"sell", tour. satin“purchase”, Balk., Karach. satyb"purchase" etc.

arm. Seł"oblique", gr. σκολιοσ “curve” – Chuv. Calas“bevel, slope”, Tat. culak, tour. calIk"crooked".

arm. tal, gr. γαλωσ, lat. glos"daughter-in-law" - Turk. gellin"bride-in-law".

arm. tarap'"rain" - Chuv. tapar"waterhole".

arm. teleli"place" - Chuv. tl"place".

arm. t"uk""saliva" - Turkm. tujkulik, Karach., Balk. tukuruk"saliva", eider. tukurmäa"spit", etc.

arm. thosel"fly" - Turk. dus- "fall".

Not all Turkisms have been preserved in the Armenian language, and some have not yet been discovered, so there is a group of Turkic roots present only in Greek. There is no doubt that for some of them, over time, correspondences can be found in Armenian. A separate group among the Greek-Turkic lexical correspondences are Greek-Chuvash, which occur from a later time. The ancient Bulgars, staying in the Black Sea region for a long time, borrowed a certain number of words from Greek, but Armenian correspondences are not necessary for them. They are on the same list.

gr. αγροσ, lat. age, German Acker"field" - Turk. ek-(Chuv. ak, akăr) "sow". Frisk considers Indo-European words to be borrowed.

gr. αιτεω “to ask, demand” – Chuv. viten"begging", tour. otunmek"to ask, to bother", D. Turk. ajit- “ask”, etc. Frisk does not give a reliable etymology of the word.

gr. ακακια, lat. acacia; "acacia" - Society. Turk. agoc"wood". Frisk considers the Greek word "foreign".

gr. αλφι "barley", αλφη "barley groats" - commonly. Turk. arpa"barley".

gr. αμα "medicine" - commonly. Turk. em-“medicine, treat” (turkm., gag., tur. em).

gr. αραχνη, lat. araneus"spider" - Chuv. eresmen, eider. orumzak, az. horumcək"spider". Frisk becomes possible kinship with αρκυσ "network", which does not have a reliable etymology.

gr. αρμα, "cart" – dist. Turk. Araba, arba"cart".

gr. αρωμα "smell" - Türkic. aram/erem(Chuv. erem) "wormwood". See also Chuv. armuti. Frisk marks the word as "inexplicable".

gr. αρσην “man” – Chuv. arcyn"Human". There are identical, according to Frisk, Iranian words Av., Other Persian. arsan-, there is also a similar word in Armenian - asn(from ancient arsn). However, judging by phonetics, the Chuvash word was borrowed from Greek.

gr. αρταω “hang up, hang up” – Chuv. urtan"hang", tour. tat., kaz. art- “hang”, etc. Frisk considers the Greek word derived from αειρω, which is doubtful. This is a borrowing from Turkic.

gr. αταλοσ "young" – Chuv. atalan"develop".

gr. δεω "bind" - Society. Turk. duv- "knot" (turkm. duvun, Chuv. tEvE and etc.). Frisk connects the Greek word with OE. dita- "connected".

gr. ηθμοσ “sieve, sieve” – Chuv. atma"net for catching fish, birds." Frisk does not give a reliable etymology for the Greek word, but it comes from ηθεω "sift through a sieve". Obviously the Chuvash word is borrowed from Greek.

gr. κηλη "tumor" – Chuv. kele"heel"

gr. κηλησισ “bewitching power” – Chuv. kělě "prayer". Doubtful parallel.

gr. κηροσ “wax, honeycombs” – Chuv. Karas"honeycombs". The source of borrowing into Chuvash is unknown, since the root of the word is of Indo-European origin and is present in many languages.

gr. κορβανοσ "temple treasury" – Chuv. kărman"body".

gr. κορωνη "any curved object" – Chuv. xuran"cauldron, cauldron".

gr. λακκοσ, lat. lacus, irl. loch etc. “pit, puddle, lake” – Chuv. lakam"pit",

gr. λισγαριον (λισγοσ) “hoe” – Crimean-Tat. uluskar, Kaz. lesker"hoe". Frisk does not find a reliable explanation for the word.

gr. λάτρις "servant", λατρεύς "servant", lat. latro 1. "servant". 2. "robber", OE loddere"beggar", Dr.-V.-N. lotar"empty, vain", German. Lotterbube"lodar" - Chuv. lutra"short".

gr. μηκον “poppy” – Chuv. măkăn'"poppy".

gr. μηλον “small cattle, sheep” - commonly. Turk. mal"livestock, property".

gr. μονασ “proud” – Chuv. manas"lonely".

gr. μόσσυν “wooden tower” – Chuv. maš"tower".

gr. παλτον “spear, dart” – commonly. Turk. balta"axe".

gr. παστη “dough” – Karach., Balk. basta"porridge".

gr. πυργοσ “tower”, lat. burgus“castle, tower” - D. Turk. barq“house, building”, Chuv. purak“(cylindrical) box”, germ. * burg(German Burg“burg, city), Alb. burg"prison". Frisk considers it possible to borrow a Greek word from a Germanic one. Obviously, the word common in many languages ​​\u200b\u200bcan be attributed to this root barrack obscure origin.

gr. πυροσ “wheat”, lit. pūraĩ"winter wheat", rus. wheatgrass- Chuv. pări"spelt". The word is of Indo-European origin. The source of borrowing into Chuvash is unknown.

gr. σακκοσ “bag”, lat. saccus"bag" - Chuv. sak“top”, Ukrainian, Russian, sak“fishing tackle in the form of a bag” and other Slavic words of this type.

gr. σαρδινη “herring” – Chuv. çărtan"pike".

gr. θαλασσα “sea” – dist. Turk. talaj, talaš"sea".

gr. υλη “forest” – Chuv. ulax"water meadow".

gr. φιλεω “to love” – Chuv. pĕl“to know, to be able, to pay attention, to feel”.

gr. χαρτησ “papyrus map”, lat. carta “paper, sheet” – Chuv. xărta"patch". Frisk notes the word as being of unclear origin.

gr. χολη “bile” – Chuv. xala"Bulany" (light yellow). The word is of Indo-European origin, but the Greek form is closest to the Chuvash.

gr. χορτοσ “pen, hedge”, lat. hortus garden, germ. gardon"garden" - Chuv. karta"fence, fence"

From the third millennium BC. part of the ancient Turks, known as carriers of the culture of battle axes and corded ceramics, moved to the Right Bank of the Dnieper and further to Central Europe. We do not know how many and which of the Turkic tribes crossed the Dnieper. It is only known for sure that most of them assimilated among the Indo-Europeans and pre-Indo-European natives. Only one Turkic tribe, namely the tribe of the ancient Bulgars, retained its ethnic identity. The first with whom the Turks came into linguistic contact on the Right Bank were the bearers of the Trypillia culture. Obviously, some words from the Trypillian language have been preserved in the language of modern Chuvash, who are descendants of the ancient Bulgars. In addition, the ancient Bulgars must have had contacts with the Italics and Illyrians in those days. Since that time, lexical parallelisms have been found in the Latin and Chuvash languages. Naturally, in the examples given, most of the Chuvash words:

lat. abbas"abbot" - Chuv. apas"priest". In the etymological dictionary of the Latin language ( Walde A.1965). this word is not considered and is considered to be borrowed through Greek from Aramaic ( abba"father"), At first, this word was allegedly used in prayers in the meaning of "my father" ( Kluge Friedrich. 1989, 7). However, Chuv. apăs"priest", which comes from an ancient Turkic word for close relatives, including father ( aba/apa), as a source of borrowing, should have an advantage, because when borrowing from Aramaic and using in prayers, the word abbas should have been used when referring to God and not to His servants.

lat. alga"algae", Norv. dial. ulka“tina” – Chuv. jalma"mud, silt, slime". Kornilov also parallels Chuv. jylxa"duct".

lat. amicuc"friend", amō"I love" - ​​Chuv. dial. ami friend, brother. The Latin word is considered to be borrowed from an unknown language (W.);

lat. arca"box" - Chuv. arca"box". The Latin word comes from arceō“I close”, akin to the Greek αρκεω “I save” (W.);

lat. artemisia"wormwood" - Chuv. armuti"sagebrush". German Wermut"wormwood" is also here. In the etymological dictionary of the Latin language, this word is not considered.

lat. cama“short board, bunks, shelf” – Chuv. khama"board". The Latin word is considered to be borrowed from the Celto-Iberian. (W.);

lat. candere"to be red-hot", gr. κανδαροσ "hot coals, heat", etc. I.-e. - Chuv. kǎntǎr"noon, south".

lat. casa“house, hut” – Chuv. kasa"street", previously meant "settlement". The Latin word belongs to the words of a common root kat- with the meaning "house";

lat. caudex, cōdex“trunk, stump” - Turkish, eider. kutuk"trunk, stump". It is believed that the Latin word is derived from cudere"beat" (W.);

lat. cicuta"hemlock" - Chuv. kiken"hellebore". Both plants are poisonous. The Latin word does not have convincing I.-e. parallels (W.);

lat. citare"to move" cito"fast" - Chuv. xytă"strong", "fast", karach., balk. qaty"fast";

lat. cocles, literally, “crooked, one-eyed” – Chuv. kuklek“curve”/ The Latin word has no reliable etymology, possibly borrowed from Greek (W.);

lat. cupa"bucket, barrel" - Turkish, Turk. kova, chag. qopa and other similar “buckets”. Indo-European words of a similar meaning do not quite correspond phonetically (see W.);

lat. cura"care" - Chuv. xural"security". The connections of the Latin word are doubtful (see W.);

lat. delirium"nonsense" - chuv tiler, tat. tiles"crazy". The Latin word has no etymology (W.);

lat. fabula"gossip" - Chuv. pavra"talk, talk" The Latin word has no close parallels in the Indo-European languages, but it is believed that it comes from I.-E. * bha- “to speak” (W.);

lat. * falterna plant of the family kirkazonovyh ( Aristolochia) - Chuv. věltěren"nettle" ( Urtica Gen) - the Latin word is restored by Meyer-Lübke on the basis of the French fauterne and Old Provencal fauterna with the note “Woher?” (where?). One can assume the ancient Bulgarian origin of the word;

lat. farnus"ash tree" - Chuv. verene"maple". The supposed Etruscan origin of the word is unfounded (W.);

lat. faux"throat" - gag. buaz Kirg. buvaz, Tur., Kaz., Karach., Balk. bogaz etc. “throat, pharynx”. The Latin word has no reliable parallels in the Indo-European languages ​​(W.);

lat. felix"fertile" - Chuv. pulǎx"fertility";

lat. finis"end, limit" - Chuv. pinĕš"one thousand";

lat. homo“man, man, husband” - the word borrowed from the Italics by the ancestors of the Chuvash subsequently lost, but its traces were preserved in the second part of the Chuv. pajaxam"brother-in-law". The first part of the word meant "sister". It is also lost in Chuvash, but is present in other closely related Turkic languages: Turkm. bajy, “husband's sister”, tour. bacI"sister". In general, the word stands for "sister's husband", but the brother-in-law is the husband's brother. This discrepancy is explained by the fact that the relationship of the same person's kinship may be different depending on the side of kinship, which often leads to a change in the meaning of the same word. Perhaps Chuv. xǎrxǎm"slave", which can be translated as "cowardly person" ( xǎra"cowardly").

lat. ius, iuris 1. right - Chuv. jărăs"straight", tour. yasa“law, charter”, Karach. džoruq“law”, etc. The assignment of the Latin word to the Indo-Aryan words with the meaning “healthy, sacred” (Other Ind. voh) is very doubtful (div. W).

lat. ius, iuris 2. soup, ear - Chuv. jaska- the general name of the first dishes, juskăň"silt, mud." The assignment of the Latin word to the I.-E root iūs “multiply” looks doubtful (see W.)

lat. lacuna“swamp, deepening, failure” – Chuv. lakham"pit". The Latin word refers to the I.-e root * lacu"wet lowland" (W.)

lat. lama"swamp" - Chuv. lam"moisture, dampness". The Latin word is associated with ltsh. lama“low place, puddle”, lit. lama“low place on the field”, Bolg. crowbar “pit, cellar” (W.)

lat. mel"honey" - Turkic. ba:l“honey” is represented in the Gagauz, Turkish, Kazakh, Uzbek, Kyrgyz and other languages. Sir Gerard Clauson writes in his work: “It is generally accepted that this word (Turkic - V.S.) is a very early borrowing from some Indo-European language, which can be dated to the period when m was unacceptable at the beginning of a word and was therefore replaced by b . The closest parallel is lat. mel; Sanskrit form - madhu» ( Clauson Gerard, 1972, 330). However, the Sanskrit form belongs to the Indo-European root * medhu(see Pokorny). Gr. μελι "honey" and other similar words found in Germanic, Celtic, Armenian are the best matches, but the origin of this word is difficult to determine.

lat. mutare"change, change" - Chuv. mutala"confuse, confuse"

lat. noxa"loss, harm" - Chuv. nusa"trouble, misfortune."

lat. order“row”, “order”, “order of battle”, “detachment” - commonly. Turkic orda"army" (turkm., kaz. orda, Chuv. urta tour., az. order etc.) The Latin word can be attributed to I.-e. * ar- "to connect, to determine." In this case, it is an ancient Nostratic root.

lat. pandura"three-stringed lute" - Chuv. păntăr-păntăr- imitation of strumming, strumming of strings, păntărtat- 1. strum, strum, make strumming, strumming sounds ( about stringed instruments), 2. crack, rumble ( about the drum)

lat. publicare"to publish" - Chuv. puple"interpret, talk, converse"

lat. pudis"Lice" - Society. Turk. bit"louse" (Chuv. pyjta, the rest - bit/pit). In the etymological dictionary of the Latin language, this word is not considered.

lat. puris"pus" - Chuv. pur"pus". Word of Indo-European origin (*pu- “rot”);

lat. quattuar"four" - Chuv tăvattă“four” in this form is borrowed from the Italians (in other Turkic languages ​​- dort/cake).

lat. Roma"Rome" - Chuv. uram, car. oram"the street". The origin of the name of the city from “Asia Minor” is not excluded * rōme"village". As you know, Rome developed from one street (see W.);

lat. saliva“saliva” is most likely borrowed from Turkic (Chuv. selleke, Turkm. selki, tat. silegej etc. “saliva”), and not related to Celtic words of distant meaning and form (for example, other Irish. sail). See W.;

lat. sapa“juice”, north-germ. safe and other similar Germanic “juice – Chuv. sapakh"ooze". Indo-European words do not have a satisfactory etymology (see W.);

lat. sāpa, -ōne, eng. soap, German Seife and others similar germ. "soap" - Chuv. supan"soap".

lat. sarda, sardine“different types of fish” – Chuv. çărtan"pike";

lat. scopula"broom" - Chuv. šăpăr“broom, broom”;

lat. sĕrra“saw” – Chuv. sĕr"to rub, to saw".

lat. sollicitare"Shake" - Society. Turk. (Chuv. sille, Turkm. selkildemek, tour. silkmek etc. “shake”). It is believed that the Latin word comes from ciēre “to move, force, agitate” (W.), which is phonetically flawed.

lat. taberna"tavern" - Chuv. tavar"salt". As noted in previous works ( Stetsyuk Valentin, 1998, 57), for the Bulgars, salt was the main export item and therefore acquired the meaning of “commodity”. In Armenian tavar means "sheep" and "flock of sheep", in the Turkic languages ​​it corresponds to tuuar"herd", tour. tavar"property", "livestock", Balkar., kr. tat. t u'ar"the same" In many Iranian languages ​​there are words tabar/teber/tevir“ax”, while in the Finno-Ugric words of this root they mean “cloth” (Sami. tavar, Mar. tuvir, hunt. tagar). All these things were objects of exchange and trade. Latin word * taber of unknown meaning has disappeared, but a derivative remains taberna, whose origin is inferred from trabs“beam, beam”, which is unconvincing. Similarly unconvincing borrowing from the Etruscan language (W.)

lat. (Sabine) teba"hill, hill" - Society. Turk. (Chuv. tupe, tour. tepe, Kaz. tobe etc. “mountain, peak”).

lat. tergus"back" - Chuv. tĕrke"knot, skein, armful."

lat. tortus“winding, twisted” – Chuv. tarta"twist, bridge a nest." The Latin word has no reliable etymology (W.)

lat. torus"elevation" - Chuv. tără"vertex". In the etymological dictionary of the Latin language, the word is not considered in this sense (W.)

lat. tuba"pipe" - Chuv. tupă"a gun".

lat. tunica“type of clothing” – Chuv. tum"coverage, cover"

lat. ūsus, ūtor“benefit, use, custom” – Chuv. usa"benefit". Indo-European parallels to numerous Latin words of this root are doubtful (W.)

lat. vacca"cow" - Chuv. văkăr"bull". The Ukrainian language has a word Waqar"shepherd of cattle." It is considered to be borrowed from the Romanian văkar “the same”, which comes from lat. * vacarius associated with lat. vacca (Melnichuk O.S. 1982, 321). Lat. vacca contacts other ind. vasa "calf cow" (W.);

lat. Vallis"valley" - Chuv. valak"gutter".

lat. vapor“steam, smoke, fire” – Chuv. Vupăr"unclean spirit"

lat. vetare“not to allow, forbid, contradict” – Chuv. vit"cover, protect, overcome."

lat. villa"country house" - Chuv. velle"hive".

lat. virga“branch, twig” without correspondences in other Indo-European languages ​​(see W.) – Old Turk. berga“rod, rod, whip”, Haqqani, Uighur berge"whip". Gerard Clauson writes: "This is supposed to be a borrowing from the Latin virga‘rod, stick’ adopted through Middle Persian, but there are no traces of this word in Persian, and the theory is unfounded” ( Clauson Gerard, 1972, 363). This also includes Hungarian. virgacz“twig, rod”, whose borrowing from Latin is doubtful. In this case, Hung can be compared to them. virgin“agile, nimble, lively”, which has a correspondence in the Chuvash - virken"rush". Obviously, this is a wandering word, traces of which in different, but close meanings can be found in many languages ​​(for example, Erzya verka"quick", Russian tag and other similar Slavic ones with the meanings “twig”, “tree earring”, etc., German. Birke and other similar German "birch", Hung. virag"flowers", marie vurgo"stalk", Kurd. wurg"alive"). If the carriers of the Trypillian culture were Semites, then the fundamental principle of all these words may be a word close to ar. firh and other Hebrew. perax"flower". Then lat. virgo“virgin” of unclear origin (W.) should be included here (cf. “defloration”).

lat. vulgus, volgō, vulgus“people”, “herd”, “crowd”, lat vulgaris“ordinary, simple” – Chuv. pulkka“herd”, “flock”, “crowd”, Bulgars- the name of one of the Turkic tribes, German. Volk, eng. folk, "people", other ind. vargah"group", a few Celtic words and an ethnonym wolves also belong here (W.)

Literature

Melnichuk O.S. (Ed.) 1982-1989 - . Etymological dictionary of Ukrainian language. Kyiv.

Nadelyaev V.M., Nasilov D.M., Tenishev E.R., Shcherbak A.M. 1969. Ancient Turkic Dictionary. Leningrad.

Vasmer Max. 1964-1974. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow. "Progress".

Clauson Gerard, Sir (1972). An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish. Oxford.

Frisk H. (1970). Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg.

Hübschman Heinrich (1972). Armenische Grammatik. Erster Teil. Etymology. Hidelsheim - New York.

Kluge Friedrich (1989). Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin-New York.

Meyer-Lübke W. (1992). Romanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg.

Pokorny J. (1949-1959). Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern.

(W.) - Walde A. (1965). Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg.

• Specialty HAC RF10.02.02
• Number of pages 160

CHAPTER 1. PROBLEMS OF STUDYING ETHNOCULTURAL LEXIS

OF TURKIC ORIGIN IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

1.1. Issues of onomastics in Russian and Turkic languages

1.2. Features of vocabulary in the onomastics of the Turkic languages

1.3. Origin and development of Turkic borrowings

1.4. Comparative study of Russian and Turkic vocabulary

CHAPTER II. CONCEPT-THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF ONOMASTIC VOCABULARY OF TURKIC ORIGIN IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

2.1. General ethnocultural vocabulary of Turkic origin in Russian

2.2. Anthroponyms of Turkic origin in Russian

2.3. Oronyms and oikonyms of Turkic origin in the vocabulary of the Russian language

2.4. Toponyms and ethnonyms in the vocabulary of the Russian language

2.5. Mythonyms of Turkic origin in Russian

CHAPTER III. SEMANTIC-MORPHOLOGICAL STRUCTURE

ONOMASTIC VOCABULARY OF THE TURKIC ORIGIN IN

IN RUSSIAN

3.1. Synonymy in the onomastics of the Russian language

3.2. Homonymy in the system of mythological onomastics

3.3. Morphological structure of onomastic vocabulary of Turkic origin

Recommended list of dissertations

• Onomastic Vocabulary of Azerbaijani Mythoepics 2004, candidate of philological sciences Shabanova, Shakhnaz Gilalovna

• Conceptual-thematic and morphological features of the vocabulary of the Kumyk language in religious and mythological texts 2006, candidate of philological sciences Sheygasanova, Galina Muzhaidovna

• Functional features of Arabic lexemes in the Kumyk language: based on epic works 2012, candidate of philological sciences Murtazalieva, Laila Anvarovna

• Development in the Russian language of Turkisms with unclear foundations 2004, candidate of philological sciences Korkmazova, Lyalya Manafovna

• Lexico-grammatical development of Kumyk borrowings by the Salatav dialect of the Avar language 2007, candidate of philological sciences Makhmudova, Patina Murtazalievna

Introduction to the thesis (part of the abstract) on the topic "Ethnocultural vocabulary of Turkic origin in the Russian language"

This dissertation work is devoted to a systematic and complex study of borrowed Turkic lexemes of ethno-cultural content in the Russian language. A comprehensive study of ethno-cultural elements, their lexical and morphological structure is one of the urgent tasks of linguistics, because their comparative and comparative historical analysis can answer many unclear questions of the morphological and lexical composition and the historical past of the Russian language. Issues of semantic, lexical and etymological development of the ethno-cultural components of the Russian language are considered in the dissertation in conjunction with the problems of their origin and classification.

The study, first of all, is focused on the fact that the vocabulary and morphology in the Russian language have not yet been sufficiently studied in the comparative historical aspect and in its relation to the Turkic languages. A comparative historical study of ethnocultural terms requires the allocation of a significant layer of borrowings from the Turkic languages, which is a rather complex and time-consuming task. The complexity of this problem is evidenced by the fact that in existing works, the opinions of various researchers on the problem of the origin of Orientalisms and the definition of a specific language - the source of Turkisms diverge in many respects. For this reason, an attempt was made in the dissertation to broadly cover the issue of the origin of Turkisms with the involvement of data on the Turkic and Indo-European languages.

The vocabulary of any language is divided into words denoting universal concepts, and words with national ethno-cultural meanings.

Words with universal meanings include, firstly, service parts of speech, numerals, pronouns and some categories of adverbs, and secondly, names and verbs denoting universal, practically timeless and extraspatial concepts, for example, "young", "old", "good", "bad", "child", "man", "water", "sky", "eat", "sleep", "walk", etc.

Ethnocultural vocabulary includes: 1. Names of natural phenomena, characteristic of the area where native speakers of a given (certain) language live. 2. Vocabulary of material culture. 3. Vocabulary of spiritual culture: a) terms of kinship and family relations and gender and age classification of people; b) terms of public relations; c) words relating to the spiritual life of people (music, art, entertainment), education and upbringing; d) words characterizing people in the system of social relations and values; e) words related to mythology, folklore and rituals (Akhmetyanov, 1981, 52).

The need to study the ethnocultural vocabulary of the Russian and Turkic peoples as a whole is dictated by the material itself: the data on individual languages ​​complement each other and make it possible to determine the genesis and development of a number of concepts and expressions. Russian and Turkic languages ​​and peoples over the last millennium, i.e. during their formation in the form in which we see them today, they developed in the same or very similar socio-political and economic conditions, were part of the same state formations: Bulgaria (Volga Bulgaria), Golden Horde, Kazan Khanate and the Russian Empire. This circumstance predetermined intensive mutual influence.

At the same time, the Turkic regions of Russia, which were weakly separated geographically, were subject to strong external influences. Of particular importance was the fact that all the Turkic peoples of the Russian state were part of the widest circle of closely related Turkic peoples who were in continuous cultural communication due to ethnic, linguistic, religious and other ties.

The disappearance of the Turkic states on the territory of Russia and the creation Russian Empire, the resettlement of Russians further complicated ethno-cultural relations. Whenever state power changed, cultural attitudes changed, i.e. orientation to certain sources and standards of culture, and this led to a reassessment of values, which was reflected in the fate of words expressing concepts related to mythology, folklore, rituals and other ethno-cultural concepts. All this makes the etymological study of words common to the Russian and Turkic languages ​​difficult and important, especially considering that the history of these peoples is not sufficiently covered in written monuments.

The relevance of the research topic is due to a number of circumstances. First of all, it should be noted that the Russian language is characterized not only by a number of specific phonetic and grammatical features, but also by the presence in its vocabulary of peculiar characteristics due to historical contacts with other languages, both genetically related and unrelated.

A significant place in the vocabulary of the Russian language is occupied by Turkisms. Although some aspects of Turkisms in the Russian language are to some extent touched upon in scientific articles and monographs of various researchers, however, in general, Turkic vocabulary has not yet been subjected to a comprehensive monographic study. Meanwhile, the Turkisms are characterized by bright specific features of the phonetic, semantic and morphological order. On the material of Turkisms one can trace various sound processes, lexico-semantic phenomena, morphological changes, which, of course, is of considerable interest for the study of Russian and other Slavic languages.

For the Russian language, the results of a comprehensive study of Turkisms, especially ethnocultural vocabulary, can serve as an invaluable source of restoration of individual fragments of its history.

The object of the study is the identification of lexical units of Turkic origin associated with various aspects of the life and way of life of the Slavic peoples. Insufficient knowledge of Russian orientalisms in an intercultural perspective requires a comprehensive analysis of ethnocultural terms of Turkic origin in the Russian language.

The subject of the study is the ethno-cultural lexical components of Turkic origin in the Russian language.

Material and sources of research. The main source was the material of the Russian literary language and folklore. In addition, the material of dialects of the Russian language, as well as other related Slavic languages, is involved. We also used data from a number of old-written monuments and materials from dictionaries for Russian and contact languages.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the work was the works of well-known domestic and foreign linguists in Slavic, Turkic, Arabic, Persian and Indo-European languages ​​on similar issues.

The degree of study of the topic. The lexico-semantic and etymological aspects of the borrowed ethno-cultural vocabulary of the Russian language in the monographic aspect are studied in a comprehensive manner for the first time by us. The paper attempts to highlight the ways of penetration of Turkisms into the Russian language and show the degree of adaptation of lexemes by the borrowing language.

The following provisions of the study are defended:

1. A significant part of the ethno-cultural vocabulary of Turkic origin in the Russian language is presented in the form of connected roots in the composition of stems containing common roots, but having different morphological design.

2. The identification of three main lexico-semantic layers (anthroponyms, toponyms, ethnonyms) in Russian borrowed onomastics allows us to imagine the nature of Turkic onomastics, its distinctive and common features with other languages.

3. Many Turkic anthroponyms in the Russian language remain connected with Turkic ethnonyms, act as correlative pairs, differing in vocalism and consonantism. The etymological analysis of Turkic homonyms in Russian makes it possible to assume that in ". in most cases, the primary terms go back to a common etymon, which is the basis for further semantic changes.

4. Many Türkic homonyms are borrowed by contact languages, * represent derivative forms due to the further morphological development of Türkic roots and stems.

5. The results of lexico-thematic and lexico-semantic studies of the mythological and onomastic vocabulary of the Russian language indicate that borrowed lexemes have features characteristic of all Turkic languages.

Purpose of the study. The main goal of our study is to identify and comprehensive, systemic and complex description of the ethno-cultural elements of the Russian language. Achieving this goal requires setting and solving a number of specific tasks:

Analysis of the lexical structure of Turkic ethno-cultural lexemes in the Russian language;

Establishment and identification of archetypes and proto-forms in the system of Turkic ethno-cultural vocabulary in the Russian language;

Revealing the conceptual-thematic and lexical-semantic categories of ethno-cultural Turkisms and determining their place in the lexical system of the Russian language;

Comparative historical analysis of individual lexemes in terms of resolving the problems of their origin;

Characterization of phonetic, semantic and morphological changes of Turkisms in the system of the Russian language and, if possible, their causal justification.

Scientific novelty of the research. This work is a comprehensive multi-aspect monographic study of ethno-cultural terms of Turkic origin in the Russian language. It consistently examines the phonetic, morphological and lexical-semantic features of the ethno-cultural elements of the Russian language. The problem of the origin of Turkisms is one of the rather complex and controversial problems. In this regard, the dissertation provides a broad coverage of this issue with the involvement of data on the Turkic, Semitic, ^Arabic^ and Indo-European languages. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that various phonetic, semantic and morphological processes characteristic of the Turkisms of the Russian literary language and its dialects are defined and covered in detail.

The theoretical significance of the work lies in the fact that the study of primordial elements and orientalisms at the phonetic, lexical-semantic and morphological levels is of paramount importance for the development of issues of descriptive and comparative historical phonetics, lexicology and morphology of the Russian language. The results of the study of Turkic lexemes and morphemes shed light on a number of unexplained issues of phonetics, morphology, vocabulary and semantics of the Russian language in the system of Turkisms, which makes it possible to trace the history of the development of its many structural patterns on different levels. The solution of such problems is impossible without highlighting a significant layer of Turkisms and their comprehensive and systematic study.

The practical value of the work lies in the fact that the materials and results of the study of ethno-cultural elements in the Russian language can be used: 1) in the practice of teaching the Russian language at school and at the university (special courses and special seminars on lexicology); 2) when compiling textbooks and teaching aids for students in the relevant sections, 3) when compiling various kinds of dictionaries, including when compiling an etymological dictionary of the Russian language; 4) in research on history, ethnography and sociology.

Research methods. The dissertation work mainly uses comparative-historical, comparative-comparative and typological methods with historical and comparative appeals to closely related languages ​​and dialects of Slavic languages. Attempts to clarify the etymology of a number of lexical units required a wide application and methods of comparative historical analysis. In a number of cases, the results of synchronic analysis are covered in the aspect of diachrony, and the method of typological analysis is also involved.

Approbation of work. The main provisions and conclusions of the dissertation research were discussed at a meeting of the Department of Karachay and Nogai Philology and the Department of the Russian Language of the Karachay-Cherkess State University (2001-2005), as well as at the scientific final conferences of teachers and graduate students of the Karachay-Cherkess State University (2002-2005), the results of the study were applied and teaching and working with students. On the topic of the dissertation, articles and abstracts have been published, which reflect the main provisions and results of the study.

Structure and scope of the study. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of used literature and conditional abbreviations.

Similar theses in the specialty "Languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation (indicating a specific language or language family)", 10.02.02 VAK code

• Agrobotanical vocabulary of the Alkhodzhakent dialect of the Kumyk language 2006, candidate of philological sciences Abdullaeva, Umamat Abdullaevna

• Phonetic-morphological and lexical-semantic features of the Yersin dialect of the Azerbaijani language 2006, candidate of philological sciences Magomedova, Elmira Galimovna

• Native and borrowed vocabulary of the Yersin dialect of the Derbent dialect of the Azerbaijani language 2012, candidate of philological sciences Gadzhieva, Narmina Gyulagaevna

• The system of adaptation of borrowed vocabulary of Turkic and Finno-Ugric origin in modern Russian dialects of the Oka-Volga-Sura region 2005, Doctor of Philology Syvorotkin, Mikhail Mikhailovich

• Turkic lexical borrowings in the system of North Caucasian languages 2006, Doctor of Philology Tadinova, Roza Abdumanapovna

Dissertation conclusion on the topic "Languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation (indicating a specific language or language family)", Bauchieva, Zainef Borisovna

CONCLUSION

A comparative typological study of the borrowed onomastic vocabulary of the Russian language shows that it contains several layers of different chronological levels. A significant part of the mythological vocabulary of the Russian language includes words borrowed from the Turkic languages. It contains several sections: a) Oguz-poly-regional onomastics, i.e. onyms characteristic not only for the Turkic languages, but also for some Altaic languages. Most of this vocabulary is presented in the form of connected roots, i.e. as part of the bases containing common roots, but having a different morphological design; b) Oghuz-common Turkic onomastics, i.e. words known within the Oguz and other Turkic languages, but not common in other Altaic languages; c) Oguz-Inter-Turkic onomastics, i.e. words common mainly in the Oguz languages, but also available in some other groups of Turkic languages; d) proper Oghuz onomastics is typical only for the Oghuz languages ​​and is absent in other Turkic languages ​​(absent in other Neo-Oghuz Turkic languages^.

The identification of three main lexical-thematic layers in Russian borrowed onomastics: anthroponyms, toponyms, ethnonyms - gives a sufficient idea of ​​the nature of Turkic onomastics, its distinctive and common features with other languages.

As part of a number of Russian anthroponyms borrowed from a Turkic source, there is an opposition of hard-row and soft-row vowels: -a-= -e- = -i-, which performs a semantic function;

A number of borrowed anthroponyms in the Russian language have been preserved only as part of the passive vocabulary, have become archaisms and are not used in the literary language. Anthroponish in Russian preserve vocative, or vocative, forms of Turkic primary sources. A number of anthroponyms retain forms with an affectionate or diminutive meaning, expressed in the Turkic primary source with the help of various suffixes.

Many Turkic onyms in the Russian language are polysemantic. Many Turkic anthroponyms of the Russian language remain connected with Turkic ethnonyms. Some Turkic anthroponyms in Russian act as correlative pairs, differing in vocalism or consonantism, where one of the components is used as an anthroponym in the male line, the other - in the female line.

In the formation of the Turkic onyms of the Russian language, the phrases play a certain role: a) a combination of antonyms; b) a combination of synonyms; c) defining combinations; d) collective combinations.

The etymological analysis of the Turkic onyms of the Russian language makes it possible to assume that in most cases the primary terms go back to a common etymon, which is the basis for further semantic modifications. The structure of many onyms is determined by the features of not only semantic processes, but also phonetic ones. Peripheral phonetic features of Turkic terms in the system of mythological onomastics have a significant impact on the disclosure of the etymological structure of Turkic mythological terms.

The restored original semes of a number of Turkic onyms of the Russian language receive typological confirmation on the material of other Turkic and Altaic languages. Many Turkic onyms of Russian mythology were borrowed by the contact languages. For the most part, Turkic onyms are derivative forms.

Many Turkic onyms of the Russian language represent a further morphological development of Turkic roots and foundations. The presence in Russian onomastics of a significant number of various specific terms and, in particular, the names of peoples, indicates their acquaintance from ancient times with many other ancient ethnic groups.

The etymological analysis of the Turkic onyms of the Russian language is completely based on their lexical material, which indicates the originality of the main components of this lexical-thematic category.

Russian onyms of Turkic origin, possessing phonetic-semantic hallmarks, have at the same time common features with some Mongolian parallels. Many onyms are the result of the semantic development of certain lexemes. Some Russian onyms of Turkic origin have passed into the category of archaisms.

In terms of historical morphology, it should be noted that many Turkic onyms of the Russian language are the result of morphological development. A comparative typological study of Russian mythology and onomastics makes it possible to establish that many terms in the indicated lexical and thematic categories have a direct genetic connection with the corresponding terms of the Mongolian and Tungus-Manchu languages.

The phonetic structure of the Turkic elements of Russian mythological onomastics fully corresponds to the phonetic features of the Turkic languages. At their core, the Turkic variants in the phonetic aspect are secondary forms, since they are almost always the result of natural phonetic changes.

The semantic structure of the Turkic onyms of Russian mythology and onomastics is characterized by a significant branching of sememes connected with each other by various semantic relations. All lexical and thematic categories of onyms analyzed in this work are closely related to each other.

The paper provides an etymological description of a number of Russian mythological terms of Turkic origin. In some cases, our opinion coincides with the assumptions of previous researchers, in all other cases a new etymological interpretation is given. Concerning the problem of native and borrowed vocabulary of the Russian language, it should be noted that among the terms we studied, some can be classified as borrowings, but in the vast majority of cases these terms are native Turkic. The results of the lexico-thematic and lexico-semantic study of the mythological and onomastic vocabulary of the Russian language allow us to assert that all these borrowed lexemes have all the features that are characteristic of all Turkic languages.

Morphological features of the mythological and onomastic vocabulary of the Russian language are clearly revealed on the material of nominal and verbal word formation. In the system of Turkic mythological and onomastic word-formation, the most characteristic suffixes are: -з;-т; -dyz// -holes; -ki; -kyu: -sh; -n; -ur; -kar, -gar.

These are the main results of the first experience of the descriptive-typological study of the mythological and onomastic vocabulary of Turkic origin in the Russian language, the further study of which is urgent task modern Russian and Turkic linguistics.

List of references for dissertation research Candidate of Philological Sciences Bauchieva, Zaynef Borisovna, 2005

1. Abaev V. I. Ossetian language and folklore. M.-L., 1949. - T. I.

2. Adilov M. S. Compound words in the modern Azerbaijani language: Abstract of the thesis. diss. cand. philol. Sciences. Baku, 1958.

3. Azerbaev E.G. Issues of Turkic-Japanese language relations: Abstract of the thesis. dis. cand. philol. Sciences.-Alma-Ata, 1982.

4. Aleksandrov L.S. On the concept of synonymy // Lexical synonymy. -M., 1967.

5. Azimov P. Turkmen language (Word-building affixes). - Ashgabat, 1950.

6. Aleksanyan Zh.S. Historical and functional-stylistic characteristics of Russian phraseological units of biblical origin. Abstract dis.cand. philol. Sciences. Makhachkala, 2002.

7. Aleksanyan Zh.S. Biblical phraseological units in the organization of special classes at the university // Humanitarian sciences and new education technologies. Abstracts. report Makhachkala, 2001.

8. Aliev F.F. Essays on the vocabulary of the language of the Turks of Kazakhstan. - Alma-Ata, 1973.

9. Amanzholov S. A. Questions of dialectology and history of the Kazakh language - Alma-Ata, 1959.

10. Amirov G.S. Synonyms in the works of G. Tukay. // Turkic lexicology and lexicography. M., 1971.

11. Amosova M.N. Word and context // Uchenye zapiski Leningrad State University. L., 1958.

12. Antonov N. K. Research on the historical vocabulary of the Yakut language: Abstract of the thesis. diss. Dr. Philol. Sciences. -Yakutsk, 1973.

14. Arakin V.D. Compound nouns with the first adjective component of color in Turkish. // Turcolodika. To the 70th anniversary of Academician A.N. Kononov. JL, 1976.

15. Aslanov V.I. Historical lexicology of the Azerbaijani language: Abstract of the thesis. dis. cand. philol. Sciences-Baku, 1973.

16. Aslanov V.I. On lexical parallels in "Kutadgu Bilik" and in the Azerbaijani language. // ST, 1970. No. 4.

17. Akhmanova O.S. Dictionary of linguistic terms. M., 1966.

18. Akhmetyanov R. G. General vocabulary of the spiritual culture of the peoples of the Middle Volga.-M., 1981.

19. Akhundov A. The experience of phonetic generalization and grammatical description of body parts in the Azerbaijani language // ST, 1976, No. 5.

20. Akhundov A. Names of parts of the human body ending in -z in the Azerbaijani language // Soviet Turkology. Baku, 1978. - No. 3.

21. Baghirov G. Lexico-semantic development of the verb in the Azerbaijani language: Abstract of the thesis. diss. . Dr. Philol. Sciences. -Baku, 1966.

22. Basel Ch. E. Linguistic typology // Principles of typological analysis of languages ​​of various systems. M., 1972.

23. Bazilkhan B. Brief comparative-historical grammar of the Mongolian and Kazakh languages. Alma-Ata, 1974.

24. Bayramov G.A. Fundamentals of the phraseology of the Azerbaijani language: Abstract of the thesis. diss. Dr. Philol. Sciences. -Baku, 1970.

25. Bakirov M.Kh. Genesis and ancient forms of pan-Turkic poetry. Abstract of the thesis. Ph.D. thesis Sciences. Kazan, 1999.

26. Bakirov M.Kh. Mythology, folklore genrelars Bem shigyr gyyleme buencha mekaleler seriase (Series of articles on mythology, folklore genres and theory of verse) // Edebiyat beleme suzlege (Dictionary of literary terms) .-Kazan, 1990.

27. Bakirov M.Kh. Sak belen Sok kaylardan quile? (Where did Sak28 come from

Please note that the scientific texts presented above are posted for review and obtained through recognition of the original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in the PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

Turkic languages ​​are a family of languages ​​spoken by numerous peoples and nationalities of the USSR, Turkey, part of the population of Iran, Afghanistan, Mongolia, China, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Albania. The question of the genetic relationship of these languages ​​to the Altaic languages ​​is at the level of a hypothesis that involves the unification of the Turkic, Tungus-Manchu and Mongolian languages. In the Altaic literature, the typological similarity of the Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungus-Manchu languages ​​is sometimes mistaken for a genetic relationship.

Formation:

The formation of individual Turkic languages ​​was preceded by numerous and complex migration their carriers. In the 5th c. the movement of Gur tribes from Asia to the Kama region began; from the 5th-6th centuries Turkic tribes from Central Asia (Oghuz, etc.) began to move into Central Asia; in 10-12 centuries. the range of settlement of the ancient Uighur and Oghuz tribes expanded (from Central Asia to East Turkestan, Central and Asia Minor); at the beginning of the 2nd millennium, the Kyrgyz tribes from the Yenisei moved to the current territory of Kyrgyzstan; in the 15th century consolidated Kazakh tribes.

By modern geography distribution, the Turkic languages ​​\u200b\u200bof the following areas are distinguished: Central and Southeast Asia, South and Western Siberia, the Volga-Kama, the North Caucasus, Transcaucasia and the Black Sea.

Classification schemes of Turkology:

V.A. Bogoroditsky:

- northeastern: Yakut, Karagas and Tuvan languages;

- Khakass: Sagai, Beltir, Koibal, Kachin and Kyzyl dialects of the Khakass population of the region;

- Altai: southern branch- Altai and Teleut languages, northern branch- dialects of the so-called. black Tatars and some others

- West Siberian: all dialects of the Siberian Tatars;

- Volga-Urals: Tatar and Bashkir languages;

- Central Asian: Uighur, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Karakalpak languages; - - southwestern: Turkmen, Azerbaijani, Kumyk, Gagauz and Turkish.

V.V. Radlov:

- eastern: languages ​​and dialects of the Altai, Ob, Yenisei Trocs and Chulym Tatars, Karagas, Khakass, Shor and Tuvan languages;

- western: dialects of the Tatars of Western Siberia, Kyrgyz, Kazakh, Bashkir, Tatar and, conditionally, Karakalpak languages;

- Central Asian: Uighur and Uzbek languages;

- southern: Turkmen, Azerbaijani, Turkish, some southern coastal dialects of the Crimean Tatar language;

A.N. Samoilovich:

- Bulgarian;

- Uighur, otherwise northeastern;

- Kypchak, otherwise northwestern;

- Chagatai, otherwise southeastern;

- Kypchak-Turkmen;

- southwestern, or Oguz.

Typologically, the Turkic languages ​​are classified as agglutinative languages.. The root (basis) of the word, not being burdened with class indicators (there is no class division of nouns in the Turkic languages), in it. n. can act in its pure form.

The presence of vowel harmony and the associated opposition of the front-lingual consonants to the back-lingual ones, the absence in the original Turkic words of combinations of several consonants at the beginning of a word, at the junctions of morphemes or in the absolute outcome of a word, the special typology of syllables determine the relative simplicity of the distributive relations of phonemes in the Turkic languages.

The so-called Oguz languages ​​allow voiced stops in anlaut; the Kipchak languages ​​allow occlusions in this position, but voiceless occlusions predominate.

In the process of changing consonants in the Turkic languages, sounds with more or less complex articulation were subjected to simplification or turned into sounds of a different quality. There are common cases of voicing of consonants in the intervocalic position (characteristic of the Chuvash language and especially of the Turkic languages ​​of Siberia), numerous assimilation of consonants, especially in affixes, transition to > h and t > h before front vowels.

- nominative,

- genitive,

- accusative,

- dative-directive,

- local,

- original.

In all Turkic languages the plural is expressed with the affix -lar/-lêr, with the exception of the Chuvash language, where this function has the affix -sem.

Numerals include lexical units to denote the numbers of the first ten, for the numbers twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand; for the numbers sixty, seventy, eighty and ninety, compound words are used, the first part of which is the phonetically modified names of the corresponding units of the first ten.

Demonstrative pronouns in the Turkic languages ​​reflect 3 plans for the arrangement of objects in space:

- closest to the speaker;

- more remote;

- the most remote.

The paradigm of personal pronouns includes forms of three persons singular. and many others. h., with their declension in a number of languages, the vowel of the stem changes in the dative-directive case in the singular. Reflexive pronouns are based on independent nouns.

In all Turkic languages, except for the Chuvash language, there is an indicator -yr/-ar for the future tense (present-future). The Oguz languages ​​are characterized by the form of the future categorical tense in -adzhak/-achak, it is also common in some languages ​​of the southern area (Uzbek, Uighur).

Turkic languages ​​have active, passive, reciprocal and imperative voices.

Models of formation of the main types of phrases both attributive and predicative in Turkic languages ​​they are united; the dependent member precedes the principal. A characteristic syntactic category in the Turkic languages ​​isizafet : this type of relationship between two names permeates the entire structure of the Turkic languages.

A simple sentence in the Turkic languages ​​is the predominant syntactic structure; it tends to include such substitute clauses.

Various subordinating relations are conveyed by participial, participle, verb-nominal constructions.

In the structure of the Turkic languages, conditions were laid for the development of allied proposals. In the development of complex sentences of the allied type, the influence of Arabic and Persian played a certain role. Constant contact of speakers of Turkic languages ​​with Russians also contributed to the development of allied means (eg, in the Tatar language).

In the word-formation of the Turkic languages, affixation prevails. There are also ways of analytical word formation: paired names, reduplication, compound verbs, etc.

The oldest monuments of the Turkic languages ​​date back to the 7th century BC. The writing of all the Turkic languages ​​of the USSR since the late 30s - early 40s. based on Russian graphics. Turkish uses a Latin-based alphabet. Throughout their history, the Turks used the Turkic runic (ascending, apparently, to the Sogdian script), Uighur script (later passed from them to the Mongols), Brahmi, Manichaean script, and Arabic script. At present, writings based on Arabic, Latin and Cyrillic are common.

Modern Turkic languages

General information. Name options. Genealogical information. Spreading. Linguistic information. General dialect composition. sociolinguistic information. Communicative-functional status and rank of the language. Degree of standardization. Educational and pedagogical status. Type of writing. Brief periodization of the history of the language. Intrastructural phenomena caused by external language contacts.

Turkey - 55 million
Iran - from 15 to 35 million
Uzbekistan - 27 million
Russia - 11 to 16 million
Kazakhstan - 12 million
China - 11 million
Azerbaijan - 9 million
Turkmenistan - 5 million
Germany - 5 million
Kyrgyzstan - 5 million
Caucasus (without Azerbaijan) - 2 million
EU - 2 million (excluding UK, Germany and France)
Iraq - from 500 thousand to 3 million
Tajikistan - 1 million
USA - 1 million
Mongolia - 100 thousand
Australia - 60 thousand
Latin America (excluding Brazil and Argentina) - 8 thousand people
France - 600 thousand
Great Britain - 50 thousand
Ukraine and Belarus - 350 thousand people
Moldova - 147,500 (Gagauz)
Canada - 20 thousand
Argentina - 1 thousand
Japan - 1 thousand
Brazil - 1 thousand
Rest of the world - 1.4 million

DISTRIBUTION OF THE TURKIC LANGUAGES

Turkic languages- a family of related languages ​​of the alleged Altaic macrofamily, widely spoken in Asia and Eastern Europe. The area of ​​distribution of the Turkic languages ​​extends from the basin of the Kolyma River in Siberia in the southwest to the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea. The total number of speakers is more than 167.4 million people.

The area of ​​distribution of the Turkic languages ​​extends from the basin
R. Lena in Siberia southwest to the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea.
In the north, the Turkic languages ​​are in contact with the Uralic languages, in the east, with the Tungus-Manchurian, Mongolian and Chinese languages. In the south, the area of ​​distribution of the Turkic languages ​​is in contact with the area of ​​distribution of Iranian, Semitic, and in the west - with the area of ​​distribution of Slavic and some other Indo-European (Greek, Albanian, Romanian) languages. The bulk of the Turkic-speaking peoples of the former Soviet Union live in the Caucasus, the Black Sea region, the Volga region, Central Asia, and Siberia (western and eastern). In the western regions of Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and in the south of Moldova, Karaites, Crimean Tatars, Krymchaks, Urums and Gagauz live.
The second area of ​​settlement of the Turkic-speaking peoples is connected with the territory of the Caucasus, where Azerbaijanis, Kumyks, Karachays, Balkars, Nogais and Trukhmens (Stavropol Turkmens) live.
The third geographical area of ​​settlement of the Turkic peoples is the Volga region and the Urals, where Tatars, Bashkirs and Chuvashs are represented.
The fourth Turkic-speaking area represents the territory of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, where Uzbeks, Uighurs, Kazakhs, Karakalpaks, Turkmens, and Kirghiz live. The Uighurs are the second largest Turkic-speaking nation living outside the CIS. They constitute the main population of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of the PRC. In China, along with the Uighurs, there are Kazakhs, Kirghiz, Uzbeks, Tatars, Salars, Saryg-Yugurs.

The fifth Turkic-speaking area is represented by the Turkic peoples of Siberia. In addition to the West Siberian Tatars, this zonal group is made up of Yakuts and Dolgans, Tuvans and Tofalars, Khakasses, Shors, Chulyms, and Altaians. Outside the former Soviet Union, the bulk of the Turkic-speaking peoples live in Asia and Europe. The first place in terms of number is occupied by
Turks. Turks live in Turkey (more than 60 million people), Cyprus, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Romania, France, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Switzerland. In total, over 3 million Turks live in Europe.

Based on the current geographical distribution, all modern Turkic peoples are divided into four areal-regional groups. Areal-regional distribution (from west to east) of modern Turkic languages: Group I - South Caucasus and Western Asia - 120 million people: (south-western Turkic languages ​​- Azerbaijani, Turkish); Group II - North Caucasus, Eastern Europe - 20 million people: (North-Western Turkic languages ​​- Kumyk, Karachay - Balkar, Nogai, Crimean Tatar, Gagauz, Karaim, Tatar, Bashkir, Chuvash): Group III - Central Asia - 60 million people: (southeastern Turkic languages ​​- Turkmen, Uzbek, Uighur, Karakalpak, Kazakh, Kyrgyz); Group IV - Western Siberia - 1 million people: (North-Eastern Turkic languages ​​- Altai, Shor, Khakass, Tuvan, Tofalar, Yakut). The cultural vocabulary of modern Turkic languages ​​will be considered by me in five semantic groups: flora, fauna, climate, landscape and economic activity. The analyzed vocabulary is divided into three groups: common Turkic, areal and borrowed. Common Turkic words are those that are recorded in ancient and medieval monuments, and also have parallels in most modern Turkic languages. Areal-regional vocabulary - words known to one or more modern Turkic peoples living on the same common or adjacent territories. Borrowed vocabulary - Turkic words of foreign origin. The vocabulary of the language reflects and preserves the national specificity, however, in all languages, to some extent, there are borrowings. As you know, foreign borrowings occupy an important place in replenishing and enriching the vocabulary of any language.

Tatars and Gagauz also live in Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia. The proportion of Turkic-speaking peoples in Iran is large. Along with Azerbaijanis, Turkmens, Qashqais, Afshars live here. Turkmens live in Iraq. In Afghanistan - Turkmens, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Uzbeks. Kazakhs and Tuvans live in Mongolia.

Scientific discussions on the belonging and correlation of languages ​​and their dialects within the Turkic languages ​​do not cease. So, for example, in his classic fundamental scientific work "The Dialect of the West Siberian Tatars" (1963), G. Kh. Akhatov presented materials on the territorial settlement of the Tobol-Irtysh Tatars in the Tyumen and Omsk regions. Having subjected the phonetic system, lexical composition and grammatical structure to a comprehensive comprehensive analysis, the scientist came to the conclusion that the language of the Siberian Tatars is one independent dialect, it is not divided into dialects and is one of the oldest Turkic languages. However, initially A. The Bogoroditsky language of the Siberian Tatars belonged to the West Siberian group of Turkic languages, where he also included the Chulym, Baraba, Tobol, Ishim, Tyumen and Turin Tatars.

Problems

Drawing boundaries within many Turkic, especially the smallest, associations is difficult:

· the differentiation of language and dialect is difficult - in fact, the Turkic languages ​​at all stages of division reveal the situation of a diasystem, a dialect continuum, a language cluster and / or a language complex, at the same time there are various ethnolects that are treated as independent languages;

· are described as dialects of one language belonging to different idiom subgroups (Turkic mixed languages).

For some classification units - historical and modern - there is very little reliable information. So, practically nothing is known about the historical languages ​​of the Ogur subgroup. About the Khazar language, it is assumed that it was close to the Chuvash language - see Linguistic encyclopedic Dictionary, M. 1990 - and actually Bulgar. The information is based on the testimony of the Arab authors al-Istakhri and Ibn-Khaukal, who noted the similarity of the languages ​​of the Bulgars and the Khazars, on the one hand, and the dissimilarity of the Khazar language to the dialects of the other Turks, on the other. The belonging of the Pecheneg language to the Oguz ones is assumed on the basis of the ethnonym itself. Pechenegs, comparable with the Oguz designation of a brother-in-law baʤanaq. Of the modern ones, the Syrian-Turkmen, local dialects of Nogai, and especially the Eastern Turkic, Fuyu-Kyrgyz, for example, are poorly described.

The question of the relationship between the selected groups of the Turkic branch proper, including the relationship of modern languages ​​with the languages ​​of runic monuments, remains ambiguous.

Some languages ​​were discovered relatively recently (Fuyu-Kyrgyz, for example). The Khalaj language was discovered by G. Dörfer in the 1970s. and identified in 1987 with the argu mentioned by his predecessors (Baskakov, Melioransky, etc.).

It is also worth mentioning the points of discussion that arose due to the mistakes made:

· disputes about the genetic affiliation of the ancient Bulgarian language: the discussion is initially meaningless, since the language that became the basis of the modern Chuvash belongs to the most ancient Ogur branch, and the literary language of the Tatars and Bashkirs is historically a regional variant of the Turkic language;

Identification of the Gagauz language (including its archaic Balkan variant) with the Pecheneg language: the Pecheneg language had completely died out by the Middle Ages, while the modern Gagauz language, in essence, is nothing more than a continuation of the Balkan dialects of the Turkish language;

· attributing the Salar language to the Sayan; the Salar language is certainly Oghuz, but as a result of contacts it has many borrowings from the Siberian area, including features of consonantism and the word adıg instead of aju"bear" and jalaŋadax"barefoot" on a par with the original ajax"leg" (cf. Tat. "yalanayak");

· attributing the Saryg-Yugur language to Karluk (including the interpretation as a dialect of the Uighur) - the similarity is the result of language contacts;

· mixing of various idioms, for example, Kumandin and Tubalar, Middle Chulym and Lower Chulym dialects when describing the so-called Kuerik and Ketsik dialects or historical Orkhon-Uyghur and Old Uyghur.

Dolgan/Yakut

Altai / Teleut / Telenginsky / Chalkan (Kuu, Lebedinsky)

Altai-Oirot

Tofalar - Karagas

information from the book by A. N. Kononov "History of the study of Turkic languages ​​in Russia. Pre-October period" (Second ed., supplemented and corrected, Leningrad, 1982). The list shows that both those with a long history (Turkish, Turkmen, Tatar, Crimean Tatar, Kumyk) and those with a small history (Altaic, Chuvash, Tuvan, Yakut) are named languages. Consequently, the authors paid more attention to the literary form, to its functional completeness and prestige, the idea of ​​the dialect is obscured here, in the shade.

As can be seen from the list, non-written forms of a number of peoples (Baraba, Tatar, Tobolsk, Shor, Sayan, Abakan) are also named adverbs or dialects, but also written forms that are relatively young (Nogai, Karakalpak, Kumyk) and rather old (Turkmen, Crimean Tatar, Uzbek, Uighur, Kyrgyz).

The use of terms indicates that the authors were primarily attracted by the non-written state of languages ​​and the relative similarity with it of written literary languages ​​with underdeveloped functions and styles. In this case, both previous methods of naming were combined, indicating both the insufficient development of dialectology and the subjectivity of the authors. The variegation of the names shown above reflected the complex path of the formation of the Turkic languages ​​and the no less complex nature of its perception and interpretation by scientists and teachers.

By 30-40 years. 20th century in theory and practice, the terms literary language - the system of its dialects - are fully fixed. At the same time, the struggle between the terms for the entire family of languages ​​(Turkic and Turkic-Tatars), which went on during the 13th-19th centuries, ends. By the 40s. 19th century (1835), the terms Türk/Turkic acquired a generic, and Turk/Turkish - specific status. This division was also fixed in English practice: turkiс "Turkic and turkish "Turkish" (but in Turkish practice turk "Turkish" and "Turkic", French turc "Turkish" and "Turkic", German turkisch "Turkish" and "Turkic") According to information from the book "Turkic Languages" in the "Languages ​​of the World" series, there are a total of 39 Turkic languages.This is one of the largest language families.

Taking the possibility of understanding and verbal communication as a scale for measuring the proximity of languages, the Turkic languages ​​are divided into close ones (tur. -az. -gag.; nog-karkalp. -kaz.; tat. -bashk.; tuv. -tof.; yak. - long), relatively distant (Turkish - Kaz.; Az. - Kirg.; Tat. - Tuv.) and quite distant (Chuv. - other languages; Yakuts. - other languages). There is a clear pattern in this gradation: differences in the Turkic languages ​​increase from west to east, but the opposite is also true: from east to west. This rule is a consequence of the history of the Turkic languages.

Of course, the Turkic languages ​​did not immediately reach such a level. This was preceded by a long path of development, as comparative historical studies show. The Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences has compiled a volume with group reconstructions that will make it possible to trace the development of modern languages. In the late period of the Proto-Turkic language (III century BC), dialect groups of various chronological levels are formed in it, which gradually break up into separate languages. There were more differences between groups than between members within groups. This general difference persisted later in the development of specific languages. The separated languages, being unwritten, were kept and developed in folklore, until their generalized forms were developed and the social conditions for the introduction of writing were ripe. By the VI-IX centuries. n. e. for some Turkic tribes and their associations, these conditions arose, after which runic writing appeared (VII-XII centuries). Monuments of runic writing name a number of large Turkic-speaking tribes and their unions: turk, uyyur, qipcaq, qirgiz. It was in this linguistic environment on the basis of the Oguz and Uighur languages ​​that the first written literary language was formed, serving many ethnic groups in a wide geographical area from Yakutia to Hungary. A scientific position has been put forward that different systems of signs (more than ten types) existed in different periods, leading to the concept of various regional variants of the runic literary language, which served the social needs of the Turkic ethnic groups. The literary form did not necessarily coincide with the dialect basis. Thus, among the ancient Uighurs of Turfan, the dialect form differed from the written literary morphology and vocabulary, among the Yenisei Kyrgyz, the written language is known from epitaphs (this is a d-language), and the dialect form, according to reconstructions, is similar to the group of z-languages ​​(Khakas, Shor, Sarygyugur, Chulym-Turkic), on which the epic "Manas" began to take shape.

The stage of the runic literary language (VII-XII centuries) was replaced by the stage of the ancient Uyghur literary language (IX-XVIII centuries), then they were replaced by the Karakhanid-Uyghur (XI-XII centuries) and, finally, Khorezm-Uyghur (XIII-XIV centuries) literary languages ​​that served other Turkic ethnic groups and their state structures.

The natural course of development of the Turkic languages ​​was disrupted by the Mongol conquest. Some ethnic groups have disappeared, others have been displaced. On the arena of history in the XIII-XIV centuries. new ethnic groups appeared with their own languages, which already had literary forms or developed them in the presence of social conditions up to the present day. The Chagatai literary language (XV-XIX centuries) played an important role in this process.

With the appearance of modern Turkic peoples on the historical arena before their formation into separate nations, the Chagatai language (together with other old languages ​​- Karakhanid-Uighur, Khorezm-Turkic and Kypchak) was used as a literary form. Gradually, it absorbed local folk elements, which led to the emergence of local variants of the written language, which, unlike the Chagatai as a whole, can be called the literary language of the Turks.

Several variants of the Turki are known: Central Asian (Uzbek, Uighur, Turkmen), Volga (Tatar, Bashkir); Aral-Caspian (Kazakh, Karakalpak, Kyrgyz), Caucasian (Kumyk, Karachay-Balkarian, Azerbaijani) and Asia Minor (Turkish). From this moment on, we can talk about the initial period of modern Turkic national literary languages.

The origins of the Turkic variants date back to different periods: among the Turks, Azerbaijanis, Uzbeks, Uighurs, Tatars - to the XIII-XIV centuries, among the Turkmens, Crimean Tatars, Kirghiz and Bashkirs - to the XVII-XVIII centuries.

In the 20-30s in the Soviet state, the development of the Turkic languages ​​took a new direction: the democratization of the old literary languages ​​(they found modern dialectal foundations) and the creation of new ones. By the 30-40s of the XX century. Scripts were developed for the Altai, Tuvan, Khakass, Shor, and Yakut languages. In the future, the position of the Russian language, which strengthened in the social sphere, restrained the process of the functional development of the Turkic languages, but, of course, they could not stop it. The natural growth of literary languages ​​continued. In 1957, the Gagauz people received the written language. The development process continues to this day: in 1978, writing was introduced among the Dolgans, in 1989 - among the Tofalars. The Siberian Tatars are preparing to introduce writing in their native language. Each nation decides this issue for itself.

The development of the Turkic languages ​​from an unwritten form to a written one with a system of dialects subordinate to it did not change significantly either in the Mongolian or in the Soviet periods, despite negative factors.

The changing situation in the Turkic world also concerns the new reform of the alphabetic systems of the Turkic languages ​​that has begun. For the seventieth anniversary of the twentieth century. this is the fourth total change of alphabets. Probably only the Turkic nomadic perseverance and strength can withstand such a social burden. But why waste it for no apparent social or historical reason - I thought so in 1992 during the international conference of Turkologists in Kazan. In addition to purely technical shortcomings in the current alphabets and spellings, nothing else was indicated. But for the reform of alphabets, social needs are in the foreground, and not just wishes based on any particular moment.

Currently social reason alphabetical substitution was indicated. This is the leading position of the Turkish people, their language in the modern Turkic world. Since 1928, Latin writing has been introduced in Turkey, reflecting the uniform system of the Turkish language. Naturally, the transition to the same Latin basis is also desirable for other Turkic languages. This is also a force that strengthens the unity of the Turkic world. The spontaneous transition to the new alphabet has begun. But what does the initial stage of this movement show? It shows the complete inconsistency of the actions of the participants.

In the 1920s, the reform of the alphabet in the RSFSR was directed by a single body - the Central Committee of the New Alphabet, which, on the basis of serious scientific development, compiled unified systems of alphabets. At the end of the 30s, the next wave of alphabetic change was carried out by the forces of the Turkic peoples themselves without any coordination among themselves due to the lack of a coordinating body. This inconsistency has not yet been resolved.

It is impossible to ignore the discussion of the problem of the second alphabet for the Turkic languages ​​of countries with Muslim culture. For the western Muslim part of the Turkic world, the eastern (Arabic) writing is 700 years old, and the European one is only 70 years old, i.e. 10 times less time. A huge classical heritage has been created on the Arabic script, which is especially valuable right now for the independently developing Turkic peoples. Can this wealth be neglected? It is possible if we stop considering ourselves Turks. It is impossible to translate the great achievements of the past culture into a transcription code. It is easier to master the Arabic script and read the old texts in the original. For philologists, the study of Arabic writing is mandatory, but for the rest, it is optional.

The presence of not one, but several alphabets in one people is not an exception either now or in past times. The ancient Uighurs, for example, used four different writing systems, and history has not preserved any complaints about this.

Together with the problem of the alphabet, the problem of the general fund of Turkic terminology arises. The task of generalizing the Turkic terminological systems was not solved in the Soviet Union, remaining the exclusive right of the national republics. The unification of terminologies is closely related to the level of development of sciences, which is reflected in the concepts and their names. If the levels are the same, then the unification process is not particularly difficult. In the case of differences in levels, the reduction of particular terminologies into something unified seems to be extremely difficult.

Now we can only raise the question of preliminary measures, in particular, the discussion of this topic at scientific associations. These associations can be built along professional lines. As, for example, the association of Turkologists: linguists, literary critics, historians, etc. The association (commission) of Turkologists-linguists discusses the state of, say, grammatical theory in various parts of the Turkic world and makes recommendations for the development and unification of its terminology, if possible . In this case, the review of the state of science itself is very useful. To recommend now the terminology of a language to all is to start from the end.

One more direction draws attention, the scientific and social significance of which for the Turkic world is obvious. This is a search for common roots, symbolizing the unified character of the Turkic world. Common roots lie in the lexical treasury of the Turks, in folklore, especially in epic works, customs and beliefs, folk crafts and art, etc. - in a word, it is necessary to compose a corpus of Turkic antiquities. Other nations are already doing this. Of course, it needs to be thought through, a program drawn up, and executors and leaders of the work must be found and trained. It will probably require a small temporary Institute of Turkic Antiquities. Publication of the results and their implementation in practice will be an effective means of preserving and strengthening the Turkic world. All these measures, taken together, will pour into the old formula of Islmail Gasprinsky - in language, thought, deeds, unity - new content.

The national lexical fund of the Turkic languages ​​is rich in original words. But the existence of the Soviet Union radically changed the functional nature and basic terminographic norms, as well as the alphabetical system of the Turkic languages. This is evidenced by the opinion of the scientist A.Yu. Musorina: “As a linguistic union, one can consider the languages ​​of the peoples former USSR. The long coexistence of these languages ​​within the framework of one multinational state, as well as the colossal pressure on them from the Russian language, led to the appearance in them of common features at all levels of their language system. So, for example, in the Udmurd language, under the influence of Russian, the sounds [f], [x], [c], which were previously absent in it, appeared in the Komi-Permyak language, many adjectives began to take shape with the suffix “-ovoi” (Russian –ovy, -ova, - new), and in Tuva new types of complex sentences that did not exist before were formed. The influence of the Russian language at the lexical level was especially strong. Almost all socio-political and scientific terminology in the languages ​​of the peoples of the former USSR is borrowed from the Russian language or formed under its strong influence. The only exceptions in this regard are the languages ​​of the peoples of the Baltic States - Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian. In these languages, the corresponding terminological systems were formed in many respects even before the entry of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia into the USSR.

inological character of the Turkish language. The dictionary of the Turkic languages ​​contained a rather large percentage of Arabisms and Iranianisms, Russisms, which, again for political reasons, were fought in Soviet times along the lines of terminological construction and open Russification. International terms and words denoting new phenomena of the economy, everyday life, ideology, were directly borrowed from Russian or from other languages ​​through the press and other media, first into speech, and then fixed in the language and replenished not only Turkic speech and terminology, but also vocabulary in general. At present, the term system of the Turkic languages ​​is intensively replenished with borrowed words and international terms. The main share of borrowed words and neologisms are the terms of European countries, including a large number of English words. However, the equivalents of these borrowed words in the Turkic languages ​​are ambiguous. As a result, the national coloring, spelling and orthoepic norms the lexical fund of the native speaker of these languages. The solution of this problem is possible thanks to the joint efforts of scientists from Turkic-speaking countries. In particular, I would like to note that the creation of a unified electronic terminological database of the Turkic peoples and the national corpus of the Turkic world and its constant updating will contribute to the effective achievement of the goal.

The languages ​​of these minority peoples are included in the "Red Book of the Languages ​​of the Peoples of Russia" (M., 1994). The languages ​​of the peoples of Russia are different in their legal status (state, official, interethnic, local) and the scope of their social functions in different spheres of life. In accordance with the Constitution of 1993, the state language of the Russian Federation throughout its territory is Russian.

Along with this, the Fundamental Law of the Russian Federation recognizes the right of the republics to establish their own state languages. Currently, 19 constituent republics of the Russian Federation have adopted legislative acts that secure the status of national languages ​​as state languages. Simultaneously with the title language of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation, which is recognized as the state language in this republic, and Russian as the state language of the Russian Federation, in some subjects other languages ​​are also given the status of the state language. So, in Dagestan, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic (1994), 8 out of 13 literary and written languages ​​are declared state; in the Karachay-Cherkess Republic - 5 languages ​​(Abaza, Kabardino-Circassian, Karachay-Balkarian, Nogai and Russian); 3 state languages ​​are declared in the legislative acts of the republics of Mari El and Mordovia.

The adoption of legislative acts in the language sphere is intended to increase the prestige of national languages, to help expand the areas of their functioning, create conditions for the preservation and development, as well as to protect linguistic rights and linguistic independence of the individual and the people. The functioning of the state languages ​​of the Russian Federation is determined in the most significant areas of communication, such as education, printing, mass communication, spiritual culture, and religion. The education system of the Russian Federation presents the distribution of functions in the following levels: preschool institutions - the language is used as a means of education and / or studied as a subject; national schools - the language is used as a medium of instruction and/or taught as a subject; national schools - the language is used as a medium of instruction and / or studied as a subject; mixed schools - they have classes with the Russian language of instruction and classes with other languages ​​of instruction, languages ​​are taught as a subject. All languages ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation, which have a written tradition, are used in upbringing and education with varying intensity and at various levels of the educational system.

Turkic languages ​​in the Russian Federation and a multifaceted, complex and urgent problem of the policy of the Russian state in the linguistic sphere of culture and national relations in general. The fate of the languages ​​of the minority Turkic ethnic groups in Russia is a problem from among the critical, screaming, firefighters: a few years can turn out to be fatal, the consequences are irreversible.
Scientists include the following Turkic languages ​​among the disappearing ones:
- Dolgansky
- Kumandin
- Tofalar
- Tubalar
- Tuva-Todzha
- chelkan
- Chulym
- Shor

Dolgany
Dolgans (self-name - Dolgan, tya-kihi, Sakha) - people in Russia, mainly in the Taimyr Autonomous Okrug of the Krasnoyarsk Territory. Believers - Orthodox). The Dolgan language is the language of the Yakut subgroup of the Turkic group of the Altaic languages. The core of the Dolgan nationality was formed as a result of the interaction of various ethnic groups: Evenks, Yakuts, Russian peasants from Zatundra, etc. The main language of communication between these groups was the Yakut language, which spread among the Tungus clans in the territory of Yakutia at the turn of the 17th-18th centuries. In general historical terms, it can be assumed that the Dolgan language retained elements of the language of the Yakuts from the period of the first waves of their migration to the territory of present-day Yakutia and gradually pushed further by subsequent waves to the northwest. The Tungus clans, which later became the core of the Dolgan people, were in contact with representatives of this wave of Yakuts and, having adopted their language, migrated with them through the territory that later became their joint homeland. The process of formation of the nationality and its language continued on the Taimyr Peninsula in the course of mutual influence of various groups of Evenks, Yakuts, Russians and their languages. They were united by the same way of life (life, household), geographical location and, mainly, the language, which by that time had become the main one in communication between them. Therefore, the modern Dolgan language, while remaining grammatically Yakut at its core, contains many elements of the languages ​​of those peoples that made up the new ethnic group. This is especially reflected in the vocabulary. Dolgan (dulgaan) is the name of one of the Evenki clans that assimilated into the new ethnic group. This name is currently used in the Russian version to refer to all representatives of this nationality. The self-name of the main Dolgan group (Khatanga region) is haka (cf. Yakut. Sakha), as well as tya kihite, tyalar - a man from the tundra, tundra people (western Dolgans). In this case, the Turkic word tya (tau, tuu, too, etc.) - "wooded mountain" in the Dolgan language acquired the meaning of "tundra". The number of Dolgans according to their censuses in the Taimyr Autonomous Okrug and Anabarsky District of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) 1959, 1970, 1979, 1989 and the preliminary results of the 2002 census in the Russian Federation is as follows: 3932 (updated data), 4877, 5053, 6929, 7000 people. According to the 1979 census, the highest percentage of those who consider their native language to be their nationality is 90 percent, in subsequent years there was a slight decrease in this indicator. At the same time, the number of Dolgans who are fluent in Russian is increasing. The Russian language is used in the official business sphere, in the press, in communication with people of other nationalities, and often in everyday life. Some of the Dolgans read books and magazines in the Yakut language, they can communicate and correspond, although they experience lexical, grammatical, and spelling difficulties.
If the independence of the Dolgans as a nationality is an indisputable fact, then the definition of the status of their language as an independent language or as a dialect of the Yakut language still causes controversy. The Tungus clans, due to the prevailing historical circumstances, having switched to the language of the Yakuts, did not assimilate among them, but, having fallen into special conditions, in the process of interaction with various ethnic groups, began to form as a new people. "Special conditions" were remoteness from the bulk of the Yakuts, a different way of life and other cultural and economic changes in the life of the Dolgans in Taimyr. For the first time, the idea of ​​independence of the Dolgan language was expressed in 1940 at the defense of E.I. Ubryatova's PhD thesis "The language of the Norilsk Dolgans". In recent years, this idea has been increasingly confirmed in the works of researchers of this language. We are talking about the isolation of the Dolgan language, which at a certain stage of its development and functioning was a dialect of the Yakut language, as a result of a long isolated development, a change in the way of life of the people, as well as a geographical and administrative branch. In the future, the Dolgan language increasingly moved away from the literary Yakut language, which was based on the dialects of the central regions of Yakutia.
It is important to emphasize that the question of the independence of the Dolgan language, like other similar languages, cannot be resolved only from a linguistic point of view. When determining the linguistic affiliation of a dialect, it is not enough to appeal only to structural criteria - it is also necessary to refer to the signs of a sociological order: the presence or absence of a common literary written language, mutual understanding between speakers, ethnic self-consciousness of the people (corresponding assessment of their language by its speakers). The Dolgans do not consider themselves either Yakuts or Evenks and recognize their language as a separate, different language. This is motivated by difficulties in mutual understanding between the Yakuts and Dolgans and the inability of the latter to use the Yakut literary language in cultural everyday life; the creation of their own written language and the teaching of the Dolgan language in schools (the impossibility of using the Yakut school literature at the same time); publication of fiction and other literature in the Dolgan language. It follows from this that the Dolgan language, even from a linguistic point of view, remaining, as it were, a dialect of the Yakut language, taking into account the complex of historical, socio-cultural, sociological factors, is an independent language. Writing in the Dolgan language was created only in the late 70s of the twentieth century. In 1978, the Cyrillic alphabet was approved, taking into account the peculiarities of the phonemic structure of the language, as well as Russian and Yakut graphics. Currently, this language is used mainly in everyday communication. The functioning of the language in print, on the radio begins. The mother tongue is taught in elementary school. The Dolgan language is taught at the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen to students - future teachers.
Of course, there are many problems in the preservation and development of the language. First of all, it is the teaching of the native language to children at school. There is a question about the insufficient methodological equipment of teachers, about the small amount of literature in the Dolgan language. It is necessary to intensify the publication of newspapers and books in this language. Of no small importance is the upbringing of children in the family in the spirit of respect for their people, traditions and native language.

Kumandins
The Kumandins (Kumandivandy, Kuvanty, Kuvandyg/Kuvandykh) are one of the Turkic-speaking ethnic groups that make up the population of the Altai Republic.
The Kumandin language is a dialect of the Altaic language or, according to a number of Turkologists, a separate language in the Khakass subgroup of the Uighur-Oguz group of Turkic languages. The number of Kumandins according to the 1897 census was 4092 people, in 1926 - 6334 people, they were not taken into account in subsequent censuses; according to preliminary data from the 2002 census in the Russian Federation - 3,000 people. The Kumandins live most compactly within the Altai Territory, in the Kemerovo Region. In the ethnogenesis of the Kumandins, as well as other tribes living in Altai, the ancient Samoyed, Ket and Turkic tribes participated. The ancient influences of various Turkic dialects are still felt today, causing disputes about the linguistic qualification of the Kumandin language. The language of the Kumandins in a number of phonetic features is close to the Shor language and partly to the Khakass. It also retained specific features that distinguish it among the Altaic dialects and even among the Turkic languages. The Kumandins of the middle and older generations use their native Kumandin in colloquial speech, the young people prefer the Russian language. Almost all Kumandins speak Russian, some consider it their native language. Writing for the Altai language was developed on the basis of one of its southern dialects - Teleut in the middle of the 19th century by the missionaries of the Altai Spiritual Mission. In this form, it was also distributed among the Kumandins. In the early 1930s, an attempt was made to teach the Kumandins in their native language. In 1933 "Kumandy-primer" was published. However, that was all. In the early 1990s, teaching in schools was in Russian. As a subject, the Altai literary language was taught, which, being different in terms of dialect base, is noticeably influenced by the local speech of the Kumandins.

soyots
Soyots are one of the few ethnic groups whose representatives live compactly in the territory of the Okinsky district of the Republic of Buryatia. According to the 1989 census, their number ranged from 246 to 506 people.
By the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Buryatia dated April 13, 1993, the Soyot National Village Council was formed on the territory of the Okinsky District of the Republic of Buryatia. In connection with the growth of national self-consciousness, on the one hand, and the possibility of obtaining an official legal status, on the other hand, the Soyots applied to the Russian parliament with a request to be recognized as an independent ethnic group, while more than 1,000 citizens filed an application with a request to change their nationality and identify them as Soyots . According to V.I. Rassadin, the Soyots of Buryatia (natives of Khusugul in Mongolia) about 350-400 years ago broke away, according to legend, from the Tsaatans, who had the same clans (Khaasuut, Onkhot, Irkit) as the Soyots. The Soyot language is included in the Sayan subgroup of the Siberian Turkic languages, which combines the languages ​​of Russian Tuvans, Mongolian and Chinese Monchaks, Tsengel Tuvans (the steppe group) and the languages ​​of the Tofalars, Tsaatans, Uighur-Uriankhais, Soyts (taiga group). The Soyot language is unwritten, in its development it experienced a significant influence of the Mongolian language, at the present stage - Buryat and Russian. Now the Soyots have almost completely lost their language: it is remembered only by representatives of the older generation. The Soyot language has been studied very poorly.

Teleuts
The Teleuts are an indigenous population living along the Sema River (Shebalinsky District of the Altai Republic), in the Chumysh District of the Altai Territory and along the Big and Small Bachat Rivers (Novosibirsk Region). Their self-name - tele"ut / tele"et - goes back to an ancient ethnonym common among the inhabitants of Altai. Like other ethnic groups of the region, the Teleuts were formed on the basis of the Turkization of local tribes of Samoyed or Ket origin. The study of toponymy showed that in addition to these components, there was a strong influence of Mongol-speaking tribes on the territory. However, the strongest layer belongs to the Turkic languages, and some of the Turkic names correlate with the ancient Turkic, as well as with the Kyrgyz, Tuvan, Kazakh and other neighboring Turkic languages. According to its linguistic features, the Teleut language belongs to the Kyrgyz-Kypchak group of the eastern branch of the Turkic languages ​​(N.A. Baskakov), therefore, it has features that unite it with the Kyrgyz language. The Altaic language has a relatively long history of fixation and study of its dialects. Recordings of individual Altaic words began from the moment the Russians entered Siberia. During the first academic expeditions (XVIII century), lexicons appeared and materials on the language were collected (D.-G. Messerschmidt, I. Fischer, G. Miller, P. Pallas, G. Gmelin). Academician V.V. Radlov made a great contribution to the study of the language. languages". The Teleut language also came to the attention of scientists and was described in the well-known "Grammar of the Altai language" (1869). It was with this dialect that the linguistic activity of the Altai Spiritual Mission, which opened in 1828, turned out to be connected. Its outstanding figures V.M.Verbitsky, S.Landyshev, M.Glukharev-Nevsky developed the first Russian-based Altaic alphabet and created a written language based on the Teleut dialect. The Altai grammar was one of the first and very successful examples of the functionally oriented grammars of the Turkic languages; it has not lost its significance to this day. V.M.Verbitsky compiled the "Dictionary of the Altai and Aladag dialects of the Turkic language" (1884). The Teleut dialect was the first to acquire a script developed by missionaries, which included the letters of the Russian alphabet, supplemented by special signs for specific Altaic phonemes. It is characteristic that with some minor changes this script exists to this day. The modified missionary alphabet was used until 1931, when a Latinized alphabet was introduced. The latter in 1938 was again replaced by writing on a Russian basis). In modern information conditions and under the influence of the school, there is a leveling of dialect differences that recede before the norms of the literary language. On the other hand, there is an offensive of the Russian language, which is spoken by the majority of Altaians. In 1989, 65.1 percent of Altaians indicated that they were fluent in Russian, while only 1.9 percent of the total number spoke the language of their nationality, but 84.3 percent consider Altai their native language (89.6 percent in the Altai Republic). The small population of Teleuts is subject to the same linguistic processes as the rest of the indigenous population of the Altai Republic. Apparently, the sphere of using the dialect form of the language will remain in family communication and in single-national production teams engaged in traditional ways of managing.

Tofalars
Tofalars (self-name - Tofa, outdated name Karagasy) - the people living mainly on the territory of two village councils - Tofalar and Verkhnegutarsky, which are part of the Nizhneudinsky district of the Irkutsk region). Tofalaria - the area where the Tofalars live, is entirely located in the mountains covered with larch and cedar. The historical ancestors of the Tofalars were the Ket-speaking Kott, Assan and Arin tribes living in the Eastern Sayans and the Sayan Samoyeds, with one of whom, the Kamasins, the Tofalars were in close contact until recently. The substratum of these tribes is evidenced by Samoyedic and especially Ket-lingual toponymy, preserved in Tofalaria. Notable elements revealed in the phonetics and vocabulary of the Tofalar language also speak of the Ket substrate. The Turkization of the aboriginal population of the Sayan occurred in the ancient Turkic time, as evidenced by those preserved in modern language Oguz and especially ancient Uighur elements. Long and deep economic and cultural contacts with the medieval Mongols, and later with the Buryats, were also reflected in the Tofalar language. Since the 17th century, contacts with the Russians began, which especially intensified after 1930 with the transfer of the Tofalars to a settled way of life. According to censuses, there were 543 Tofalars in 1851, 456 in 1882, 426 in 1885, 417 in 1927, 586 in 1959, 620 in 1970, and 620 in 1979. -m - 763 (at that time 476 people lived in Tofalaria itself), in 1989 - 731 people; according to preliminary data from the 2002 census in the Russian Federation, the number of Tofalars is 1000 people. Until 1929-1930, the Tofalars led an exclusively nomadic lifestyle and did not have stationary settlements. Their traditional occupation has long been the breeding of domestic reindeer, which are used for riding and transporting goods in packs. Other areas of economic activity were hunting for meat and fur animals, fishing, and harvesting wild edible plants. The Tofalars had not previously been engaged in agriculture, but already living settled, they learned from the Russians to grow potatoes and vegetables. Before the transition to settled life, they lived in a tribal system. After 1930, the villages of Alygzher, Nerkha and Verkhnyaya Gutara were built on the territory of Tofalaria, in which Tofalars were settled, Russians also settled here; since then, the positions of the Russian language have been strengthened among the Tofalars. The Tofalar language is included in the Sayan group of Turkic languages, which combines with it the Tuvan language, the languages ​​of the Mongolian Uighurokhuryankhais and Tsaatans, as well as the Monchaks of Mongolia and China. Comparison in general Turkological terms shows that the Tofalar language, sometimes by itself, sometimes together with other Turkic languages ​​of the Sayan-Altai and Yakut, retains a number of archaic features, some of which are comparable with the ancient Uyghur language. The study of phonetics, morphology and vocabulary of the Tofalar language showed that this language is an independent Turkic language, having both specific features and features that unite it either with all Turkic languages ​​or with their separate groups.
The Tofalar language has always been unwritten. However, its fixation was carried out in scientific transcription in the middle of the 19th century by the famous scientist M.A. Kastren, and at the end of the 19th century by N.F. Kaftanov. Writing was created only in 1989 on a Russian graphic basis. Since 1990, the teaching of the Tofalar language began in primary school Tofalar schools. A primer and a book for reading (1st and 2nd grade) were compiled ... During the nomadic life, the Tofalars had active linguistic ties only with the Kamasinians living next to them, the Tuvans-Todzhans, the Lower Sudin and Okinsky Buryats. At that time, the linguistic situation among them was characterized by the monolingualism of the overwhelming majority of the population and the Tofalar-Russian-Buryat trilingualism among a separate part of the adult population. With the beginning of settled life, the Russian language began to firmly enter the everyday life of the Tofalars. School education was conducted in Tofalaria only in Russian. The native language was gradually pushed into the sphere of domestic communication, and even then between older people. In 1989, 43 percent of the total number of Tofalars named the Tofalar language as their native language, and only 14 people (1.9 percent) were fluent in it. After the creation of writing and the beginning of teaching the Tofalar language in primary school, that is, after receiving state support, - writes the researcher of the Tofalar language V.I. Rassadin, - the interest in the Tofalar language, in the Tofalar culture among the population began to increase. The language began to be taught at school not only by Tofalar children, but also by students of other nationalities. People began to talk more in their native language. Thus, the preservation and development of the Tofalar language currently depends on the degree of state support, the provision of schools with educational and visual aids in the native language, the financial security of publications in the Tofalar language and the training of teachers of the native language, as well as the level of development of habitual forms of economic management in places of residence. Tofalars.

Tuvans-Todzhans
Tuvans-Todzhans are one of the small ethnic groups that make up the modern Tuvan nation; they live compactly in the Todzhinsky district of the Republic of Tuva, whose name sounds "todyu". The Todzhans call themselves Ty'va/Tuga/Tukha, the ethnonym dates back to ancient times.
The language of the Tuvan-Todzhans is a dialect of the Tuvan language in the Uyghur-Tyukuy subgroup of the Uyghur-Oguz group of Turkic languages. Located in North-Eastern Tuva, Todzha occupies an area of ​​4.5 thousand square kilometers, these are powerful mountain ranges in the Eastern Sayan Mountains, overgrown with taiga, and intermountain areas are swampy, originating in mountain spurs of the river flow through the wooded Todzha basin. The flora and fauna of this region is rich and diverse. Living in a mountainous area isolated the Todzhans from the rest of the inhabitants of Tuva, and this could not but affect the peculiarities of the language. Samoyeds, Kets, Mongols and Turks took part in the ethnogenesis of the Tuvan-Todzhans, as evidenced by the tribal names preserved by the modern inhabitants of Todzha, and ethnonyms common to the listed peoples, rich material is also provided by local toponymy. The Turkic ethnic component turned out to be decisive and, as various sources testify, by the 19th century the population of Todzha was Turkicized. However, in the material and spiritual culture of Tuvans-Todzhans, elements are preserved that go back to the cultures of these ethnic groups-substrates.
At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, Russian peasants moved to Todzhi. Their descendants continue to live next to the Todzhans; representatives of the older generation often speak the Tuvan language. A new wave of Russians is associated with the development of natural resources, most of them are specialists - engineers, agronomists, livestock specialists, doctors. In 1931, according to the census, there were 2,115 indigenous people (568 households) in the Todzhinsky district. In 1994, D.M. Nasilov, a researcher of the language and culture of Tuvan-Todzhans, claimed that there were about 6,000 of them. According to preliminary data from the 2002 census, there are 36,000 Tuvans-Todzhans in the Russian Federation (!). The Todzha language is under active pressure from the literary language, the norms of which penetrate through the school (the Tuvan language is taught at school from preparatory to 11th grade inclusive), the media, fiction. In Tuva, up to 99 percent of Tuvans consider their language to be their mother tongue, this is one of the highest rates in the Russian Federation of the preservation of the national language as a mother tongue. However, on the other hand, the stability of traditional forms of economic management in the region also contributes to the preservation of dialect features in Todzha: breeding deer and cattle, hunting for fur-bearing animals, fishing, that is, communication in the conditions of a familiar economic environment, and young people are also actively involved in labor activity. , which ensures linguistic continuity. Thus, the language situation among Tuvans-Todzhans should be assessed as one of the most prosperous among other small ethnic groups in the Siberian region. Well-known figures of Tuvan culture emerged from the environment of Tuvans-Todzhans. The works of the writer Stepan Saryg-ool reflected not only the life of the Todzhans, but also the peculiarities of the language of the latter.

Chelkans
Chelkans - one of the Turkic-speaking ethnic groups that make up the population of the Altai Republic, are also known under the outdated name Lebedintsy or Lebedinsky Tatars. The language of the Chelkans belongs to the Khakas subgroup of the Uighur-Oguz group of Turkic languages. Chelkans are the indigenous population of the Altai Mountains, living along the Swan River and its tributary, the Baigol. Their self-name is Chalkandu / Shalkandu, as well as Kuu-Kizhi (Kuu - "swan", from which the ethnonym "swans" and the hydronym river Swan originated from the Turkic). Tribes of Samoyedic and Kett origin, as well as Turkic tribes, whose Turkic language finally defeated foreign components, took part in the formation of the Chelkans, as well as other ethnic groups of modern Altaians. The mass resettlement of the Turks to the Altai took place in the ancient Turkic times.
The Chelkans are a small ethnic group influenced by the Altai ethnic groups, as well as living around a significant Russian-speaking population. The Chelkans are settled in the villages of Kurmach-Baigol, Suranash, Maly Chibechen and Itkuch. In the scientific literature of the mid-1990s, it was stated that there were about 2,000 Chelkans; according to preliminary data from the 2002 census, there are 900 of them in the Russian Federation.
The first fixation of the language of the Chelkants (Lebedints) belongs to Academician V.V. Radlov, who was in Altai in 1869-1871. In our time, N.A. Baskakov made a great contribution to the study of the Altai language and its dialects. In his works, he used his own expeditionary materials, as well as all previously recorded texts and materials on these dialects. The toponymy of the region of residence of the Chelkans and Altaians is generally described in the fundamental work of O.T. Molchanova "Structural types of Turkic toponyms of the Altai Mountains" (Saratov, 1982) and in the "Toponymic Dictionary of the Altai Mountains" (Gorno-Altaisk, 1979; more than 5400 entries). All Chelkans are bilingual and have a good command of Russian, which has already become native for many. Therefore, the Chelkan dialect, narrowing the scope of its functioning, remains alive only in family communication and in small production teams engaged in traditional types of economic activity.

Chulyms
Chulyms are an indigenous population living in the taiga area in the Chulym River basin, along its middle and lower reaches, within the Tomsk Region and the Krasnoyarsk Territory. Chulym language (Chulym-Turkic) - the language of the Khakass subgroup of the Uighur-Oguz group of languages, is closely related to the Khakass and Shor languages; this is the language of a small Turkic ethnic group, known under the outdated names of the language of the Chulym / Melet / Melets Tatars, it is now represented by two dialects. The entry of the Chulym language into the Turkic-speaking area of ​​Siberia testifies to the genetic links of the ancestors of its speakers, participating in the Turkization of the aboriginal population of the Chulym River basin, with the tribes speaking the Turkic languages ​​of the entire Sayan-Altai. Since 1946, the systematic study of the Chulym language began by A.P. Dulzon, a prominent Tomsk linguist: he visited all the Chulym villages and described the phonetic, morphological and lexical system of this language and gave a description of its dialects, especially the Lower Chulym. A.P. Dulzon’s research was continued by his student R.M. Biryukovich, who collected voluminous new factual material, gave a detailed monographic description of the structure of the Chulym language with special attention to the Middle Chulym dialect and showed its place among other languages ​​of the Turkic-speaking areas of Siberia. According to preliminary data from the 2002 census, there are 700 Chulyms in the Russian Federation. Chulyms came into contact with Russians starting from the 17th century, early Russian lexical borrowings were adapted according to the laws of Turkic phonetics: porta - gate, agrat - garden, start - beads, but now all Chulyms are fluent in Russian. The Chulym language contains a known number of common Turkic words that have preserved the ancient sound image and semantics; there are relatively few Mongolian borrowings in it. The terms of kinship and the system of time reference, toponymic names are peculiar. Favorable factors for the language of the Chulyms are their well-known isolation and the preservation of their usual forms of management.

Shors
The Shors are a small Turkic-speaking ethnic group living in the northern foothills of the Altai, in the upper reaches of the Tom River and along its tributaries - the Kondome and the Mrass, within the Kemerovo region. Self-name - shor; in ethnographic literature they are also known as the Kuznetsk Tatars, Black Tatars, Mrastsy and Kondomtsy or Mrassky and Kondomsky Tatars, Maturians, Abalars or Abins. The term "Shors" and, accordingly, "Shor language" in scientific turnover was introduced by academician V.V. Radlov at the end of the 19th century; he united the tribal groups of the "Kuznetsk Tatars" under this name, distinguishing them from the neighboring Teleuts, Kumandins, Chelkans and Abakan Tatars, related in language, but the term "Shor language" was finally established only in the 30s of the twentieth century. The Shor language is the language of the Khakass subgroup of the Uighur-Oguz group of Turkic languages, which indicates its relative proximity to other languages ​​of this subgroup - Khakass, Chulym-Turkic and northern dialects of the Altai language. The ethnogenesis of the modern Shors involved ancient Ob-Ugric (Samoyed) tribes, later Turkified, and groups of ancient Turks-tyukyu and tele. The ethnic heterogeneity of the Shors and the influence of a number of substratum languages ​​determined the presence of noticeable dialectal differences in the Shor language and the difficulty of forming a single spoken language. From 1926 to 1939, on the territory of the current Tashtagol, Novokuznetsk, Mezhdurechensk districts, Myskovsky, Osinnikovsky and part of the Novokuznetsk city councils, there was the Gorno-Shorsky national region. By the time the national region was created, the Shors lived compactly here and made up about 70 percent of its population. In 1939, the national autonomy was abolished and a new administrative-territorial division was carried out. Recently, due to the intensive industrial development of Gornaya Shoria and the influx of a foreign-speaking population, the density of the indigenous population has catastrophically decreased: for example, in the city of Tashtagol there are 5 percent of Shors, in Mezhdurechensk - 1.5 percent, in Myski - 3.4, and most of the Shors live in cities and towns - 73.5 percent, in rural areas - 26.5 percent. The total number of Shors, according to the 1959-1989 censuses, slightly increased: in 1959 - 15,274 people, in 1970 - 16,494, in 1979 - 16,033, in 1989 - 16,652 (15,745 of them on the territory of the Russian Federation). According to preliminary data from the 2002 census, there are 14,000 Shors in Russia. In recent decades, the number of people fluent in their native Shor language has also decreased: in 1989 there were only 998 people - 6 percent. About 42 percent of the Shors called Russian their native language, 52.7 percent are fluent in it, that is, about 95 percent of modern ethnic Shors speak Russian either as their native language or as a second language: the absolute majority has become bilingual. In the Kemerovo region, the number of Shor speakers in the total population was about 0.4 percent. The Russian language has an increasing influence on the Shor language: lexical borrowings are increasing, the phonetic system and syntactic structure are changing. By the time of the first fixation in the middle of the 19th century, the language of the Shors (Kuznetsk Tatars) was a conglomeration of Turkic dialects and dialects, however, the dialectal differences were not completely overcome in the oral communication of the Shors. The prerequisites for the creation of a national Shor language arose during the organization of the Gorno-Shorsky national region, when national statehood appeared on a single ethnic territory with compact settlement and economic integrity. The literary language was formed on the basis of the Lower Ras Goror of the Mras dialect. It published textbooks, works of original literature, translations from the Russian language, a newspaper was published. The Shor language was studied in elementary and secondary schools. In 1936, for example, out of 100 primary schools, 33 were national, out of 14 secondary schools - 2, by 1939, out of 209 schools in the district, 41 were national. In the village of Kuzedeevo, a pedagogical college was opened for 300 places, 70 of them were assigned to the Shors. A local intelligentsia was created - teachers, writers, cultural workers, and the all-Shor national self-consciousness was strengthened. In 1941, the first large scientific grammar of the Shor language, written by N.P. Dyrenkova, was published, earlier she published the volume of "Shor Folklore" (1940). After the abolition of the Gorno-Shorsky national region, the pedagogical college and the editorial office of the national newspaper were closed, rural clubs, teaching in schools and office work began to be conducted only in Russian; the development of the literary Shor language was thus interrupted, as was its impact on local dialects. The history of writing in the Shor language dates back more than 100 years: in 1883 the first book in the Shor language was published in Cyrillic - "The Sacred History", in 1885 the first primer was compiled. Until 1929, writing was based on the Russian script with the addition of signs for specific Turkic phonemes. From 1929 to 1938, a Latin-based alphabet was used. After 1938, they returned again to Russian graphics. Now textbooks and books for reading for elementary school, textbooks for grades 3-5 have been published, Shor-Russian and Russian-Shor dictionaries are being prepared, works of art are being created, folklore texts are being printed. A department of the Shor language and literature was opened at the Novokuznetsk Pedagogical Institute (the first enrollment was in 1989). However, parents do not seek to teach their children their native language. In a number of villages, folklore ensembles have been created, the main task of which is to preserve songwriting and revive folk dances. Public national movements (Association of the Shor people, the Shoria society and others) raised the issue of reviving traditional types of management, restoring national autonomy, solving social problems, especially for residents of taiga villages, and creating ecological zones.

The Russian Empire was a multinational state. The language policy of the Russian Empire was colonial in relation to other peoples and assumed the dominant role of the Russian language. Russian was the language of the majority of the population and, consequently, the state language of the empire. Russian was the language of administration, court, army and interethnic communication. The coming of the Bolsheviks to power meant a turn in language policy. It was based on the need to meet the needs of everyone to use their mother tongue and master the heights of world culture in it. The policy of equal rights for all languages ​​found wide support among the non-Russian population of the outskirts, whose ethnic self-consciousness has grown significantly during the years of revolutions and civil war. However, the implementation of the new language policy, begun in the twenties and also called language building, was hindered by the insufficient development of many languages. Few of the languages ​​of the peoples of the USSR then had a literary norm and writing. As a result of the national delimitation of 1924, based on the "right of nations to self-determination" proclaimed by the Bolsheviks, autonomous national formations of the Turkic peoples appeared. The creation of national-territorial boundaries was accompanied by a reform of the traditional Arabic script of the Muslim peoples. AT

linguistically traditional Arabic writing is inconvenient for Turkic languages, since short vowels are not indicated when writing. The reform of the Arabic script solved this problem easily. In 1924, a modified version of the Arabic alphabet was developed for the Kyrgyz language. However, even the reformed Arabic alphabet had a number of shortcomings, and most importantly, it preserved the isolation of the Muslims of the USSR from the rest of the world and thereby contradicted the idea of ​​world revolution and internationalism. Under these conditions, a decision was made on the gradual Latinization of all Turkic languages, as a result of which, in 1928, a translation into the Turkic-Latin alphabet was carried out. In the second half of the thirties, a departure from the previously proclaimed principles in language policy is planned and the active introduction of the Russian language into all spheres of language life begins. In 1938, compulsory study of the Russian language was introduced in the national schools of the Union republics. And in 1937-1940. The written language of the Turkic peoples is being translated from Latin into Cyrillic. The change in the language course, first of all, was due to the fact that the real language situation of the twenties and thirties contradicted the ongoing language policy. The need for mutual understanding in a single state required a single state language, which could only be Russian. In addition, the Russian language had a high social prestige among the peoples of the USSR. Mastering the Russian language facilitated access to information and knowledge, contributed to further growth and career. And the translation of the languages ​​of the peoples of the USSR from Latin to Cyrillic, of course, facilitated the study of the Russian language. Moreover, by the end of the thirties, the mass expectations of a world revolution were replaced by the ideology of building socialism in one country. The ideology of internationalism gave way to the politics of nationalism

On the whole, the consequences of the Soviet language policy on the development of the Turkic languages ​​were rather contradictory. On the one hand, the creation of literary Turkic languages, the significant expansion of their functions and the strengthening of their status in society, achieved in the Soviet era, can hardly be overestimated. On the other hand, the processes of linguistic unification, and later Russification, contributed to the weakening of the role of Turkic languages ​​in social and political life. Thus, the language reform of 1924 led to the break of the Muslim tradition, which nourished ethnicity, language, culture based on Arabic script. Reform 1937-1940 protected the Turkic peoples from the growing ethno-political and socio-cultural influence of Turkey and thereby contributed to cultural unification and assimilation. Russification policy was carried out until the early nineties. However, the actual language situation was much more complicated. The Russian language dominated in the management system, large-scale industry, technology, natural sciences, that is, where non-indigenous ethnic groups predominated. As for most Turkic languages, their functioning extended to agriculture, secondary education, the humanities, fiction and the media.

The language situation in Russia does not cease to be one of the acute and urgent problems. In a multinational state like the Russian Federation, active bilingualism is a social necessity - one of the main conditions for cohabitation and cooperation of multilingual peoples. However, assimilation processes have a detrimental effect on the languages ​​of the small peoples of the Russian Federation. In Russia, the proportion of those who speak their native language is declining from year to year, the percentage of those who consider language an element of ethnic identification is declining, this is especially noticeable in cities. If the process of losing interest in the language of one's own people continues to develop, this will lead to the disappearance of not only languages, but also a number of peoples of the Russian Federation. Therefore, most minor