Turkic languages

aesthetics  →
being  →
complexity  →
database  →
enterprise  →
ethics  →
fiction  →
history  →
internet  →
knowledge  →
language  →
licensing  →
linux  →
logic  →
method  →
news  →
perception  →
philosophy  →
policy  →
purpose  →
religion  →
science  →
sociology  →
software  →
truth  →
unix  →
wiki  →
essay  →
feed  →
help  →
system  →
wiki  →
critical  →
discussion  →
forked  →
imported  →
original  →
Turkic languages
[ temporary import ]
please note:
- the content below is remote from Wikipedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki
{{Short description|Language family}}{{Distinguish|Trukic languages|Turkish language}}{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2018}}

{{legend|#22B14C|Southeastern (Karluk)}}{{legend|#FBD602|Khalaj}}{{legend|#FF7F27|Northwestern (Kipchak)}}{{legend|#A349A4|Chuvash (Oghur)}}{{legend|#0000A0|Northeastern (Siberian)}}| ancestor =| glottoname =| notes =| ethnicity = Turkic peoples}}The Turkic languages are a language family of at least thirty-fiveDybo A.V., Chronology of Türkic languages and linguistic contacts of early Türks, Moscow, 2007, p. 766, WEB,weblink Archived copy, 2005-03-11, dead,weblink" title="">weblink 2005-03-11, (In Russian) documented languages, spoken by the Turkic peoples of Eurasia from Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, Central Asia and West Asia all the way to North Asia (particularly in Siberia) and East Asia. The Turkic languages originated in a region of East Asia spanning Western China to Mongolia, where Proto-Turkic is thought to have been spoken, according to one estimate, around 2,500 years ago,BOOK, Shared Grammaticalization: With Special Focus on the Transeurasian Languages,weblink Juha, Janhunen, Juha Janhunen, Martine Irma Robbeets, Hubert Cuyckens, 223, Personal pronouns in Core Altaic, 2013, from where they expanded to Central Asia and farther west during the first millennium.BOOK, Katzner, Kenneth, Kenneth Katzner, Languages of the World, Third Edition, Routledge, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Books Ltd., March 2002, 978-0-415-25004-7, Turkic languages are spoken as a native language by some 170 million people, and the total number of Turkic speakers, including second language speakers, is over 200 million.Brigitte Moser, Michael Wilhelm Weithmann, Landeskunde Türkei: Geschichte, Gesellschaft und Kultur, Buske Publishing, 2008, p.173Deutsches Orient-Institut, Orient, Vol. 41, Alfred Röper Publushing, 2000, p.611WEB,weblink Archived copy, 2014-01-15,weblink" title="">weblink 2014-01-16, dead, The Turkic language with the greatest number of speakers is Turkish, spoken mainly in Anatolia and the Balkans; its native speakers account for about 40% of all Turkic speakers.Characteristic features such as vowel harmony, agglutination, the sound "q" and lack of grammatical gender, are universal within the Turkic family. There is also a high degree of mutual intelligibility among the various Oghuz languages, which include Turkish, Azerbaijani, Turkmen, Qashqai, Gagauz, Balkan Gagauz Turkish and Oghuz-influenced Crimean Tatar.WEB, UCLA International Institute, Center for World Languages,weblink Language Materials Project: Turkish, 2007-04-26, February 2007,weblink" title="">weblink 11 October 2007, dead, dmy-all, Although methods of classification vary, the Turkic languages are usually considered to be divided equally into two branches: Oghur, the only surviving member of which is Chuvash and Common Turkic, which includes all other Turkic languages including the Oghuz subbranch.Turkic languages show some similarities with the Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic and Japonic languages. These similarities led some linguists to propose an Altaic language family, though this proposal is widely rejected by historical linguists.Vovin, Alexander. “The End of the Altaic Controversy In Memory of Gerhard Doerfer.” Central Asiatic Journal, vol. 49, no. 1, 2005, pp. 71–132.Georg, Stefan, et al. “Telling General Linguists about Altaic.” Journal of Linguistics, vol. 35, no. 1, 1999, pp. 65–98. Apparent similarities with the Uralic languages even caused these families to be regarded as one for a long time under the Ural-Altaic hypothesis.Sinor, 1988, p.710George van DRIEM: Handbuch der Orientalistik. Volume 1 Part 10. BRILL 2001. Page 336M. A. Castrén, Nordische Reisen und Forschungen. V, St.-Petersburg, 1849 However, there has not been sufficient evidence to conclude the existence of either of these macrofamilies, the shared characteristics between the languages being attributed presently to extensive prehistoric language contact.


{{See also|Altaic languages}}Turkic languages are null-subject languages, have vowel harmony, extensive agglutination by means of suffixes and postpositions, and lack of grammatical articles, noun classes, and grammatical gender. Subject–object–verb word order is universal within the family. The root of a word is basically of one, two or three consonants.


{{See also|Proto-Turkic language|Turkic peoples|Turkic migration}}


The homeland of the Turkic peoples and their language is suggested to be somewhere between the Transcaspian steppe and Northeastern Asia (Manchuria)JOURNAL, Yunusbayev, Bayazit, Metspalu, Mait, Metspalu, Ene, Valeev, Albert, Litvinov, Sergei, Valiev, Ruslan, Akhmetova, Vita, Balanovska, Elena, Balanovsky, Oleg, 2015-04-21, The Genetic Legacy of the Expansion of Turkic-Speaking Nomads across Eurasia, PLoS Genetics, 11, 4, e1005068, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005068, 1553-7390, 4405460, 25898006, The origin and early dispersal history of the Turkic peoples is disputed, with candidates for their ancient homeland ranging from the Transcaspian steppe to Manchuria in Northeast Asia,, , with genetic evidence pointing to the region near South Siberia and Mongolia as the "Inner Asian Homeland" of the Turkic ethnicity.JOURNAL, Yunusbayev, Bayazit, Metspalu, Mait, Metspalu, Ene, Valeev, Albert, Litvinov, Sergei, Valiev, Ruslan, Akhmetova, Vita, Balanovska, Elena, Balanovsky, Oleg, 2015-04-21, The Genetic Legacy of the Expansion of Turkic-Speaking Nomads across Eurasia, PLoS Genetics, 11, 4, e1005068, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005068, 1553-7390, 4405460, 25898006, "Thus, our study provides the first genetic evidence supporting one of the previously hypothesized IAHs to be near Mongolia and South Siberia.", Similarly several linguists, including Juha Janhunen, Roger Blench and Matthew Spriggs, suggest that Mongolia is the homeland of the early Turkic language.BOOK,weblink Archaeology and Language II: Archaeological Data and Linguistic Hypotheses, Blench, Roger, Spriggs, Matthew, 2003-09-02, Routledge, 9781134828692, en, Extensive contact took place between Proto-Turks and Proto-Mongols approximately during the first millennium BC; the shared cultural tradition between the two Eurasian nomadic groups is called the "Turco-Mongol" tradition. The two groups shared a similar religion-system, Tengrism, and there exists a multitude of evident loanwords between Turkic languages and Mongolic languages. Although the loans were bidirectional, today Turkic loanwords constitute the largest foreign component in Mongolian vocabulary.JOURNAL, Turkic Loanwords in Mongol, I:The Treatment of Non-initial S, Z, Š, Č, Clark, Larry V., Central Asiatic Journal, 1980, 24, 36–59, The most famous{{Citation needed|date=March 2019}} of these loanwords include "lion" (Turkish: aslan or arslan; Mongolian: arslan), "gold" (Turkish: altın; Mongolian: altan or alt), and "iron" (Turkish: demir; Mongolian: tömör).Some lexical and extensive typological similarities between Turkic and the nearby Tungusic and Mongolic families, as well as the Korean and Japonic families (all formerly widely considered to be part of the so-called Altaic language family) has in more recent years been instead attributed to prehistoric contact amongst the group, sometimes referred to as the Northeast Asian sprachbund. A more recent (circa first millennium BCE) contact between "core Altaic" (Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic) is distinguished from this, due to the existence of definitive common words that appear to have been mostly borrowed from Turkic into Mongolic, and later from Mongolic into Tungusic, as Turkic borrowings into Mongolic significantly outnumber Mongolic borrowings into Turkic, and Turkic and Tungusic do not share any words that do not also exist in Mongolic.Alexander Vovin (2004, 2010)Vovin, Alexander 2004. ‘Some Thoughts on the Origins of the Old Turkic 12-Year Animal Cycle.’ Central Asiatic Journal 48/1: 118–32.Vovin, Alexander. 2010. Once Again on the Ruan-ruan Language. Ötüken’den İstanbul’a Türkçenin 1290 Yılı (720–2010) Sempozyumu From Ötüken to Istanbul, 1290 Years of Turkish (720–2010). 3–5 Aralık 2010, İstanbul / 3–5 December 2010, İstanbul: 1–10. notes that Old Turkic had borrowed some words from the Ruan-ruan language (the language of the Rouran Khaganate), which Vovin considers to be an extinct non-Altaic language that is possibly a Yeniseian language or not related to any modern-day language. Turkic languages also show some Chinese loanwords that point to early contact during the time of proto-Turkic.BOOK,weblink The Turkic Languages, Johanson, Lars, Johanson, Éva Ágnes Csató, 2015-04-29, Routledge, 9781136825279, en, Robbeets (et al. 2015 and et al. 2017) suggest that the homeland of the Turkic languages was somewhere in Manchuria, close to the Mongolic, Tungusic and Koreanic homeland (including the ancestor of Japonic), and that these languages share a common "Transeurasian" origin.JOURNAL, 10.1163/22105832-00702005, Transeurasian: A case of farming/language dispersal, Language Dynamics and Change, 7, 2, 210–251, 2017, Robbeets, Martine,

Early written records

The first established records of the Turkic languages are the eighth century AD Orkhon inscriptions by the Göktürks, recording the Old Turkic language, which were discovered in 1889 in the Orkhon Valley in Mongolia. The Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Divânü Lügati't-Türk), written during the 11th century AD by Kaşgarlı Mahmud of the Kara-Khanid Khanate, constitutes an early linguistic treatment of the family. The Compendium is the first comprehensive dictionary of the Turkic languages and also includes the first known map of the Turkic speakers' geographical distribution. It mainly pertains to the Southwestern branch of the family.BOOK, Soucek, Svat, A History of Inner Asia,weblink registration, Cambridge University Press, March 2000, 978-0-521-65169-1, The Codex Cumanicus (12th–13th centuries AD) concerning the Northwestern branch is another early linguistic manual, between the Kipchak language and Latin, used by the Catholic missionaries sent to the Western Cumans inhabiting a region corresponding to present-day Hungary and Romania. The earliest records of the language spoken by Volga Bulgars, the parent to today's Chuvash language, are dated to the 13th–14th centuries AD.

Geographical expansion and development

With the Turkic expansion during the Early Middle Ages (c. 6th–11th centuries AD), Turkic languages, in the course of just a few centuries, spread across Central Asia, from Siberia to the Mediterranean. Various terminologies from the Turkic languages have passed into Persian, Hindustani, Russian, Chinese, and to a lesser extent, Arabic.BOOK, Findley, Carter V., The Turks in World History, Oxford University Press, October 2004, 978-0-19-517726-8, {{Verify source|date=May 2018}}The geographical distribution of Turkic-speaking peoples across Eurasia since the Ottoman era ranges from the North-East of Siberia to Turkey in the West.Turkic Language tree entries provide the information on the Turkic-speaking regions. (See picture in the box on the right above.){{Expand section|date=May 2008}}


(File:TurkicLanguages.png|thumb|upright=1.59|Relative numbers of speakers of Turkic languages)For centuries, the Turkic-speaking peoples have migrated extensively and intermingled continuously, and their languages have been influenced mutually and through contact with the surrounding languages, especially the Iranian, Slavic, and Mongolic languages.JOURNAL, Johanson, Lars, Discoveries on the Turkic linguistic map, Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, 2001,weblink 2007-03-18, {{Dead link|date=July 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}This has obscured the historical developments within each language and/or language group, and as a result, there exist several systems to classify the Turkic languages. The modern genetic classification schemes for Turkic are still largely indebted to Samoilovich (1922).{{cn|date=October 2017}}The Turkic languages may be divided into six branches:Lars Johanson, The History of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds), The Turkic Languages, London, New York: Routledge, 81–125, 1998.Classification of Turkic languages In this classification, Oghur Turkic is also referred to as Lir-Turkic, and the other branches are subsumed under the title of Shaz-Turkic or Common Turkic. It is not clear when these two major types of Turkic can be assumed to have actually diverged.See the main article on Lir-Turkic.With less certainty, the Southwestern, Northwestern, Southeastern and Oghur groups may further be summarized as West Turkic, the Northeastern, Kyrgyz-Kipchak and Arghu (Khalaj) groups as East Turkic.WEB, Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.), Ethnologue,weblink Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Fifteenth edition. Language Family Trees – Turkic, 2007-03-18, 2005, The reliability of Ethnologue lies mainly in its statistics whereas its framework for the internal classification of Turkic is still based largely on Baskakov (1962) and the collective work in Deny et al. (1959–1964). A more up to date alternative to classifying these languages on internal camparative grounds is to be found in the work of Johanson and his co-workers.Geographically and linguistically, the languages of the Northwestern and Southeastern subgroups belong to the central Turkic languages, while the Northeastern and Khalaj languages are the so-called peripheral languages.Hruschka, et al. (2014)JOURNAL, 10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.064, 25532895, 4291143, Detecting Regular Sound Changes in Linguistics as Events of Concerted Evolution 10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.064, Current Biology, 25, 1, 1–9, 2015, Hruschka, Daniel J., Branford, Simon, Smith, Eric D., Wilkins, Jon, Meade, Andrew, Pagel, Mark, Bhattacharya, Tanmoy, use computational phylogenetic methods to calculate a tree of Turkic based on phonological sound changes.


The following isoglosses are traditionally used in the classification of the Turkic languages:BOOK, Самойлович, А. Н., Alexander Samoylovich, 1922, ru:Некоторые дополнения к классификации турецких языков,weblink Russian,
  • Rhotacism (or in some views, zetacism), e.g. in the last consonant of the word for "nine" tokkuz. This separates the Oghur branch, which exhibits /r/, from the rest of Turkic, which exhibits /z/. In this case, rhotacism refers to the development of -/r/, -/z/, and -/d/ to /r/,-/k/,-/kh/ in this branch.Larry Clark, "Chuvash", in The Turkic Languages, eds. Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (London–NY: Routledge, 2006), 434–452. See Antonov and Jacques (2012) Anton Antonov & Guillaume Jacques, "Turkic kümüš ‘silver’ and the lambdaism vs sigmatism debate", Turkic Languages 15, no. 2 (2012): 151–70. on the debate concerning rhotacism and lambdacism in Turkic.
  • Intervocalic d, e.g. the second consonant in the word for "foot" hadaq
  • Suffix-final -G, e.g. in the suffix lIG, in e.g. tāglïg
Additional isoglosses include:
  • Preservation of word initial h, e.g. in the word for "foot" hadaq. This separates Khalaj as a peripheral language.
  • Denasalisation of palatal Å„, e.g. in the word for "moon", āń
{|class="wikitable" style="font-size: 85%"!|isogloss!Old Turkic!Turkish!Azerbaijani!Qashqai!Uzbek!Uyghur!Tatar!Kazakh!Kyrgyz!Altay!Western Yugur!Fu-yü Gyrgys!Khakas!Tuvan!Sakha/Yakut!Khalaj!Chuvash|z/r (nine)toquzdokuzdoqquzdoqquztoʻqqiztoqquztuɣïztoǵyztoɣuztoɣusdohghusdoɣustoɣïstostoɣustoqquztăχăr|*h- (foot)adaqayakayaqayaqoyoqayaqayaqaıaqayaqayaqazaqazïχazaχadaqataχhadaqura|*VdV (foot)adaqayakayaqayaqoyoqayaqayaqaıaqayaqayaqazaqazïχazaχadaqataχhadaqura|*-ɣ (mountain)tāɣdağ*dağdaɣtogʻtaghtawtaýtōtūtaɣdaχtaɣdaɣtıatāɣtu|suffix *-lïɣ (mountainous)tāɣlïɣdağlıdağlıdaɣlïɣtogʻliktaghliqtawlïtaýlytōlūtūlutaɣliɣdaɣluɣ
  • In the standard Istanbul dialect of Turkish, the ÄŸ in daÄŸ and daÄŸlı is not realized as a consonant, but as a slight lengthening of the preceding vowel.


The following table is based upon the classification scheme presented by Lars Johanson (1998)Lars Johanson (1998) The History of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds) The Turkic Languages. London, New York: Routledge, 81–125. weblink{| class="wikitable" Proto-Turkic Common Turkic Southwestern Common Turkic (Oghuz)(File:Oghuzlanguages6.png|upright=0.45|frameless)  | West Oghuz| East Oghuz| South Oghuz| (Arghu)  |
  • KhalajKhalaj is surrounded by Oghuz languages, but exhibits a number of features that classify it as non-Oghuz.
Northwestern Common Turkic (Kipchak)(File:Map-Kypchak Language World.png|upright=0.45|frameless)  | West Kipchak| North Kipchak (Volga–Ural Turkic)| South Kipchak (Aralo-Caspian)| Southeastern Common Turkic (Karluk)(File:Lenguas karluk.png|upright=0.45|frameless) West| East| Northeastern Common Turkic (Siberian) North Siberian| South Siberian Sayan Turkic| Yenisei Turkic|
  • Khakas
  • Fuyü Gïrgïs
  • Shor (Saghay Qaca, Qizil)
  • Western Yugur (Yellow Uyghur)Coene 2009, p. 75Coene 2009, p. 75BOOK, Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World, Contributors Keith Brown, Sarah Ogilvie, revised, 2010, Elsevier,weblink 1109, 978-0080877754, 24 April 2014, harv, BOOK, The Mainz Meeting: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, August 3–6, 1994, Turcologica Series, Lars, Johanson, Contributor Éva Ágnes Csató, 1998, Otto Harrassowitz Verlag,weblink 28, 978-3447038645, 24 April 2014, harv,
Chulym Turkic| Altai Turkic|
  • Altay Oirot and dialects such as Tuba, Qumanda, Qu, Teleut, Telengit
Oghur    | (extinct)

Vocabulary comparison

{{Expert-subject|2=section|date=November 2010}}The following is a brief comparison of cognates among the basic vocabulary across the Turkic language family (about 60 words).Empty cells do not necessarily imply that a particular language is lacking a word to describe the concept, but rather that the word for the concept in that language may be formed from another stem and is not a cognate with the other words in the row or that a loanword is used in its place.Also, there may be shifts in the meaning from one language to another, and so the "Common meaning" given is only approximate. In some cases the form given is found only in some dialects of the language, or a loanword is much more common (e.g. in Turkish, the preferred word for "fire" is the Persian-derived ateş, whereas the native od is dead). Forms are given in native Latin orthographies unless otherwise noted.{|class="wikitable" style="font-size: 85%"!!Common meaning!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Proto-Turkic!style="background-color: #d1ebeb"|Old Turkic!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Turkish!style="background-color: #e4e0f0"|Azerbaijani!Qashqai!style="background-color: #ece0f0"|Turkmen!style="background-color: #f1dfe5"|Tatar!style="background-color: #f1e9df"|Bashkir!style="background-color: #f1e9df"|Kazakh!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Kyrgyz!style="background-color: #f0f1df"|Uzbek!style="background-color: #e8f1df"|Uyghur!style="background-color: #dff1e0"|Sakha/Yakut!style="background-color: #dff1ed"|Tengri)*teŋri, *taŋrïteŋri, burqantanrıtanrı|tarï/Allah/Xodataňrytäñretäñretáńiriteñirtangritengritangaratură/toră|sky*teŋri, *kȫkkök, teŋrigökgöy|gey/göygökkükkükkókkökkoʻkkökküöxkăvak/koakAdjectives|long*uŕïnuzunuzunuzun|uzunuzynozınoðonuzynuzunuzunuzunuhunvărăm|new*yaŋï, *yeŋiyaŋïyeniyeni|yeŋiýaňyyañayañıjańajañıyangiyengisañaśĕnĕ|fat*semiŕsemizsemiz, şişmankök|semizsimezhimeðsemizsemizsemizsemizemissamăr|full*dōlïtoludoludolu|doludolytulıtulıtolytolotoʻlatoluqtolorutulli|white*āk, *ürüŋāq, ürüŋak, beyaz (Ar.)ağ|aqakaqaqaqakoqaq|black*karaqarakara, siyah (Pers.)qara|qärägaraqaraqaraqarakaraqoraqaraxarahura, hora|red*kïŕïlqïzïlkızıl, kırmızı (Ar.)qızıl|qïzïlgyzylqızılqıðılqyzylkızılqizilqizilkıhılhĕrlĕNumbers|1*bīrbirbirbir|birbirberberbirbirbirbirbiirpĕrre|2*ékiekiikiiki|ikkiikiikeikeekiekiikkiikkiikkiikkĕ|4*dȫrttörtdörtdörd|derd/dörddörtdürtdürttórttörttoʻrttörttüörttăvattă|7*yétiyetiyediyeddi|yeddiýedicideyetejetijetiyettiyettisetteśiççe|10*ōnononon|ononununononoʻnonuonvunnă, vună, vun|100*yǖŕyüzyüzyüz|iz/yüzýüzyözyöðjúzjüzyuzyüzsüüsśĕr!!!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Proto-Turkic!style="background-color: #d1ebeb"|Old Turkic!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Turkish!style="background-color: #e4e0f0"|Azerbaijani!Qashqai!style="background-color: #ece0f0"|Turkmen!style="background-color: #f1dfe5"|Tatar!style="background-color: #f1e9df"|Bashkir!style="background-color: #f1e9df"|Kazakh!style="background-color: #d6e1ec"|Kyrgyz!style="background-color: #f0f1df"|Uzbek!style="background-color: #e8f1df"|Uyghur!style="background-color: #dff1e0"|Sakha/Yakut!style="background-color: #dff1ed"|Chuvash

Endangered Turkic languages

An endangered language, or moribund language, is a language that is at risk of falling out of use as its speakers die out or shift to speaking another language. Language loss occurs when the language has no more native speakers and becomes a "dead language".


Fifteen endangered Turkic languages exist in Russia:WEB,weblink UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages in danger, WEB,weblink Atlas of languages in danger | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, {| class="wikitable sortable"! Name !! Status !! SpeakersAltai language / Northern Altay language >| 55,720Bashkir language >| 1,200,000Chulym language >| 44Chuvash language >| 1,042,989Dolgan language >| 1,100Karachay-Balkar language >| 310,000Khakas language >| 43,000Kumyk language >| 450,000Nogai language / Yurt Tatar language >| 87,000Shor language >| 2,800Siberian Tatar language >| 100,000Tofa language >| 93Tuvan language >| 280,000Tatar language >| 5,200,000Yakut language >| 450,000


In Qinghai (Amdo), the Salar language has a heavy Chinese and Tibetan influence.BOOK, Evidentials: Turkic, Iranian and Neighbouring Languages, Lars, Johanson, Bo, Utas, Volume 24 of Empirical approaches to language typology, 0933-761X, 2000, Walter de Gruyter,weblink 58, 978-3110161588, 24 April 2014, harv, Although of Turkic origin, major linguistic structures have been absorbed from Chinese. Around 20% of the vocabulary is of Chinese origin, and 10% is also of Tibetan origin. Yet the official Communist Chinese government policy deliberately covers up these influences in academic and linguistics studies, trying to emphasize the Turkic element and completely ignoring the Chinese in the Salar language.BOOK,weblink Nationalism and ethnoregional identities in China, William Safran, William Safran, 1998, Psychology Press, illustrated, 72, 978-0-7146-4921-4, Volume 1 of Cass series—nationalism and ethnicity, 2010-06-28, The Salar language has taken loans and influence from neighboring varieties of Chinese.BOOK,weblink The Handbook of Language Contact, Raymond Hickey, Raymond Hickey, 2010, John Wiley and Sons, illustrated, 664, 978-1-4051-7580-7, 2010-06-28, It is neighboring variants of Chinese which have loaned words to the Salar language. In Qinghai, many Salar men speak both the Qinghai dialect of Chinese and Salar. Rural Salars can speak Salar fluently while urban Salars often assimilate into the Chinese speaking Hui population.{{Harvcoltxt|Dwyer|2007|p=90}}


Ethnologue and ISO list an Iranian language "Khalaj" with the same population,{{e18|kjf|Khalaj (Iranian)}} but Glottolog states it does not exist.{{glottolog|khal1270|Khalaj (Iranian)}} The Khalaj speak their Turkic language and Persian, and the supposed Iranian language of the Khalaj is spurious.Hammarström (2015) Ethnologue 16/17/18th editions: a comprehensive review: online appendicesKhorasani Turkic (Khorasani Turkic: خراسان تركچىسى, Pronunciation: {{IPA|[xorɑsɑn tyrktʃesi]}}; ) is an Oghuz Turkic language spoken in northern North Khorasan Province and Razavi Khorasan Province in Iran. Nearly all Khorasani Turkic speakers are also bilingual in Persian."Ethnologue report for Khorasani Turkic"WEB,weblink UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages in danger,


Many Turkic languages have gone extinct in Afghanistan.WEB,weblink زبانهای بومی افغانستان در 'معرض خطر' اند,


In 1980, Saddam Hussein's government adopted a policy of assimilation of its minorities. Due to government relocation programs, thousands of Iraqi Turkmen were relocated from their traditional homelands in northern Iraq and replaced by Arabs, in an effort to Arabize the region.{{Harvnb|Jenkins|2008|loc=15}}. Furthermore, Iraqi Turkmen villages and towns were destroyed to make way for Arab migrants, who were promised free land and financial incentives. For example, the Ba'th regime recognised that the city of Kirkuk was historically an Iraqi Arab city and remained firmly in its cultural orientation.{{Harvnb|Anderson|Stansfield|2009|loc=64}}. Thus, the first wave of Arabization saw Arab families move from the centre and south of Iraq into Kirkuk to work in the expanding oil industry. Although the Iraqi Turkmen were not actively forced out, new Arab quarters were established in the city and the overall demographic balance of the city changed as the Arab migrations continued.Several presidential decrees and directives from state security and intelligence organizations indicate that the Iraqi Turkmen were a particular focus of attention during the assimilation process during the Ba'th regime. For example, the Iraqi Military Intelligence issued directive 1559 on 6 May 1980 ordering the deportation of Iraqi Turkmen officials from Kirkuk, issuing the following instructions: "identify the places where Turkmen officials are working in governmental offices [in order] to deport them to other governorates in order to disperse them and prevent them from concentrating in this governorate [Kirkuk]".{{Harvnb|Anderson|Stansfield|2009|loc=65}}. In addition, on 30 October 1981, the Revolution's Command Council issued decree 1391, which authorized the deportation of Iraqi Turkmen from Kiruk with paragraph 13 noting that "this directive is specially aimed at Turkmen and Kurdish officials and workers who are living in Kirkuk".As primary victims of these Arabization policies, the Iraqi Turkmen suffered from land expropriation and job discrimination, and therefore would register themselves as "Arabs" in order to avoid discrimination.{{Harvnb|International Crisis Group|2006|loc=5}}. Thus, ethnic cleansing was an element of the Ba'thist policy aimed at reducing the influence of the Iraqi Turkmen in northern Iraq's Kirkuk.{{Harvnb|Anderson|Stansfield|2009|loc=66}}. Those Iraqi Turkmen who remained in cities such as Kirkuk were subject to continued assimilation policies; school names, neighbourhoods, villages, streets, markets and even mosques with names of Turkic origin were changed to names that emanated from the Ba'th Party or from Arab heroes. Moreover, many Iraqi Turkmen villages and neighbourhoods in Kirkuk were simply demolished, particularly in the 1990s.

Other possible relations

The Turkic language family is currently regarded as one of the world's primary language families.George van DRIEM: Handbuch der Orientalistik. Volume 1 Part 10. BRILL 2001. Page 336 Turkic is one of the main members of the controversial Altaic language family. There are some other theories about an external relationship but none of them are generally accepted.


The possibility of a genetic relation between Turkic and Korean, independently from Altaic, is suggested by some linguists.JOURNAL, SIBATA, TAKESI, 1979, SOME SYNTACTIC SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TURKISH, KOREAN, AND JAPANESE, 41927271, Central Asiatic Journal, 23, 3/4, 293–296, 0008-9192, SOME STAR NAMES IN MODERN TURKIC LANGUAGES-I - Yong-Sŏng LI - Academy of Korean Studies Grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST) (AKS-2010-AGC-2101) - Seoul National University 2014A Comparative Study of Korean and Turkic - Choi Han-Woo (Hoseo Universityweblink The linguist Kabak (2004) of the University of Würzburg states that Turkic and Korean share similar phonology as well as morphology. Yong-Sŏng Li (2014)SOME STAR NAMES IN MODERN TURKIC LANGUAGES-I - Yong-Sŏng LI - Academy of Korean Studies Grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST) (AKS-2010-AGC-2101) - Seoul National University 2014 suggest that there are several cognates between Turkic and Old Korean. He states that these supposed cognates can be useful to reconstruct the early Turkic language. According to him, words related to nature, earth and ruling but especially to the sky and stars seem to be cognates.The linguist ChoiA Comparative Study of Korean and Turkic - Choi Han-Woo (Hoseo Universityweblink suggested already in 1996 a close relationship between Turkic and Korean regardless of any Altaic connections:Many historians also point out a close non-linguistic relationship between Turkic peoples and Koreans.ON THE ANCIENT RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TURKIC AND KOREAN PEOPLEweblink Especially close were the relations between the Göktürks and Goguryeo.JOURNAL, Tae-Don, Noh, 2016, Relations between Ancient Korea and Turkey: An Examination of Contacts between Koguryŏ and the Turkic Khaganate,weblink Seoul Journal of Korean Studies, en, 29, 2, 361–369, 10.1353/seo.2016.0017, 2331-4826,

Rejected or controversial theories


Some linguists suggested a relation to Uralic languages, especially to the Ugric languages. This view is rejected and seen as obsolete by mainstream linguists. Similarities are because of language contact and borrowings mostly from Turkic into Ugric languages. Stachowski (2015) states that any relation between Turkic and Uralic must be a contact one.JOURNAL, Turkic Pronouns against a Uralic Background,weblink Iran and the Caucasus, en, 19, 1, 79–86, 1609-8498,

See also



Further reading

  • Akhatov G. Kh. 1960. "About the stress in the language of the Siberian Tatars in connection with the stress of modern Tatar literary language" .- Sat "Problems of Turkic and the history of Russian Oriental Studies." Kazan. {{ru icon}}
  • Akhatov G.Kh. 1963. "Dialect West Siberian Tatars" (monograph). Ufa. {{ru icon}}
  • Baskakov, N.A. 1962, 1969. Introduction to the study of the Turkic languages. Moscow. {{ru icon}}
  • Boeschoten, Hendrik & Lars Johanson. 2006. Turkic languages in contact. Turcologica, Bd. 61. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. {{ISBN|3-447-05212-0}}
  • Clausen, Gerard. 1972. An etymological dictionary of pre-thirteenth-century Turkish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Deny, Jean et al. 1959–1964. Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2016. Parlons qashqay. In: collection "parlons". Paris: L'Harmattan.
  • Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2016. Le qashqay: langue turcique d'Iran. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (online).
  • Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2015. Qashqay Folktales. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (online).
  • Johanson, Lars & Éva Agnes Csató (ed.). 1998. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-08200-5}}.
  • Johanson, Lars. 1998. "The history of Turkic." In: Johanson & Csató, pp. 81–125.weblink
  • Johanson, Lars. 1998. "Turkic languages." In: Encyclopædia Britannica. CD 98. Encyclopædia Britannica Online, 5 sept. 2007.weblink
  • Menges, K. H. 1968. The Turkic languages and peoples: An introduction to Turkic studies. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Öztopçu, KurtuluÅŸ. 1996. Dictionary of the Turkic languages: English, Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Tatar, Turkish, Turkmen, Uighur, Uzbek. London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-14198-2}}
  • Samoilovich, A. N. 1922. Some additions to the classification of the Turkish languages. Petrograd.
  • Schönig, Claus. 1997–1998. "A new attempt to classify the Turkic languages I-III." Turkic Languages 1:1.117–133, 1:2.262–277, 2:1.130–151.
  • Starostin, Sergei A., Anna V. Dybo, and Oleg A. Mudrak. 2003. Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. Leiden: Brill. {{ISBN|90-04-13153-1}}
  • Voegelin, C.F. & F.M. Voegelin. 1977. Classification and index of the World's languages. New York: Elsevier.

External links

{{-}}{{Turkic languages}}{{Turkic topics}}{{Authority control}}

- content above as imported from Wikipedia
- "Turkic languages" does not exist on GetWiki (yet)
- time: 9:59pm EST - Thu, Nov 21 2019
[ this remote article is provided by Wikipedia ]
LATEST EDITS [ see all ]
Eastern Philosophy
History of Philosophy
M.R.M. Parrott