The Languages and Linguistics of Western Asia: An Areal Perspective (The world of Linguistics Series, volume 6) Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan (eds.), Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 2018, ISBN 978-3-11-042608-3 (hbk), 976 pp. (original) (raw)
Related papers
PROGRAM & BOOK OF ABSTRACTS LANGUAGE CONTACT AND LANGUAGE CHANGE IN WESTERN ASIA
"THE GLOSSARY “DAQĀYEQ AL-HAQĀYEQ” AS A SOURCE OF RESEARCH OF PERSIAN-TURKISH LINGUISTIC CONTACTS AND TRAINING METHODOLOGY OF THE 16TH CENTURY" The basis of this paper is the copy (MS 196, ff.027a-173b) of the glossary Daqāyeq al-Ḥaqāyeq by scholar-bureaucrat and Sheyx ul-Islam Kemāl Pāšā-zāde written in 1564/65 which is kept in the Depository of Islamic Codices of the Institute of Ancient Manuscripts – Matenadaran in Yerevan. The glossary is devoted to the explanations of Persian literal high style words, homonyms, synonyms, rarely antonyms and the words which obey the same principles of formation with homonym grammatical formatives, and an article related to the explanation of the pārsi, dari, pahlavi languages (ff 034a-035b). Daqāyeq al-Ḥaqāyeq is different from the Persian-Ottoman translation, explanatory, training and lexicographic works with the capacity of linguistic material, where the author examines more than four hundred words of Persian origin, giving their Turkish and infrequently Arabic versions accompanied with illustrative poetical quotations. It is obvious, that the Turks first became closely acquainted with Persian during the cultural renascence under the Samanids. In the 9th and 10th century New Persian gave rise to a rich literature and had a profound influence on the Turkish literary language. Turkish became the language of the Ottoman Empire, but men of culture and learning were expected to know Persian and Arabic as well. From the 11th century New Persian was widely used as a transregional lingua franca and developed into a decisive factor for a large region of the Islamic cultural area . At the end of the 14th century leading to Persian-Turkish linguistic and literal contacts and utilizing the Persian lexicographic traditions the bilingual Persian-Turkish and Turkish-Persian dictionaries started to be compiled . Since the 16th century in this lexicography the novel methods also were introduced which are distinct in the Daqāyeq al-Ḥaqāyeq glossary’s material analysis. From the methodological point of view it is important, that the compiler of the glossary except the renowned translational-paralel, general synchronic - comparative, descriptive, structural methods, used the principles of Word Choice based on homonymy, synonymy and examination of grammatical elements written as independent words and also in analysis of related words. Linguistic peculiarities, defined in this work, were highlighted not only for training and educating practical skills but also teaching Poetic language and pun for the beginners in the 16th century. So, in this period composing such glossary has visible reasons: on the one hand Turkish people apparently often lacked knowledge of Persian at least reading, and they needed such work to comprehend Persian Poetry correctly, on the other hand poets should know the refinements and details of Persian poetry (as the author of the glossary titled՝ “The Subtleties of Verities”). These skills and knowledge were reachable by the methodology which got philological approaches and trends and used ways for lexical enrichment.
Turkic Languages 15 (2011) 1 I am on the editorial board of this journal
2011
The journal TURKIC LANGUAGES is devoted to linguistic Turcology. It addresses descriptive, comparative, synchronic, diachronic, theoretical and methodological problems of the study of Turkic languages including questions of genealogical, typological and areal relations, linguistic variation and language acquisition. The journal aims at presenting work of current interest on a variety of subjects and thus welcomes con tributions on all aspects of Turkic linguistics. It contains articles, review articles, re views, discussions, reports, and surveys of publications. It is published in one vo lume of two issues per year with approximately 300 pages.
2002
These two weighty volumes actually go far in showcasing the world\u27s linguistic diversity, both past and present, in a format that is invitingly accessible to any reader with a modicum of familiarity with general linguistic terms and concepts. Engaging the curiosity of the nonspecialist is a very worthwhile goal as linguists succeed in bringing ever more language forms to the attention of the general public. However, because even the most dedicated linguist can intimately know only a miniscule fraction of the world\u27s linguistic richness, the success of any encyclopedic treatment of world languages hinges crucially on the published sources consulted. Unfortunately, the omission of so many excellent publications is precisely this book\u27s failing-and one that could only be rectified by preparing a third edition based on a thorough, systematic re-assessment of the best basic language descriptions available
The Turkic Languages edited by Lars Johanson and Éva Á. Csató
The Turkic Languages, 2022
The Turkic Languages is a reference book which brings together detailed discussions of the historical development and specialized linguistic structures and features of the languages in the Turkic family. Seen from a linguistic typology point of view, Turkic languages are particularly interesting because of their astonishing morphosyntactic regularity, their vast geographical distribution, and their great stability over time. This volume builds upon a work which has already become a defining classic of Turkic language study. The present, thoroughly revised edition updates and augments those authoritative accounts and reflects recent and ongoing developments in the languages themselves, as well as our further enhanced understanding of the relations and patterns of influence between them. The result is the fruit of decades-long experience in the teaching of the Turkic languages, their philology and literature, and also of a wealth of new insights into the linguistic phenomena and cultural interactions defining their development and use, both historically and in the present day. Each chapter combines modern linguistic analysis with traditional historical linguistics; a uniform structure allows for easy typological comparison between the individual languages. Written by an international team of experts, The Turkic Languages will be invaluable to students and researchers within linguistics, Turcology, and Near Eastern and Oriental Studies.
Eurasian linguistic foundations. (Update 05/09/2022, ) 674 pages.
Formally titled "Language Connections: Indo-European/Eurasian Words Linking Ancient Pastoralists." What is the original source of the Indo-European languages? This document/database shakes the concept of Proto-European. Were they nomads from the Urals who mixed with the Altaic peoples, including Chinese and then moved as the winds blew as it were across the Eurasian world? They shared too many words (often intermixed) to list here. "I, Mine, Me,"are shocking. These are basic pronouns that could not have been "borrowed," and there are many examples in this document that add to the notion that there was a strong mixing of the ancestors of the Indo-Europeans, Altaic peoples and Chinese. This document is presenting a language of the Eurasian herdsmen (pastoralists), indirectly through a process of elimination, as one analyzes the individual entries in this work. There are a lot of "steppe" correlations with Indo-European lexemes that compel a reevaluation of the concept of the Indo-European language group and its origins. The links between the Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Turks, Tajiks, Kyrgyz and Mongols across the steppes of Asia with European lexemes demand a review of our linguistic knowledge. Complicating this issue are the extensive links of the Akkadian lexemes with the Indo-European words. Many may be written off as words absorbed into the Hittite language and passed on to the Germanic tribes. But this does not explain the Finnish-Uralic connections. Were they involved with the Shintasta people Indo-Iranians?, that somehow communicated cultural building, mining, and fortification practices between the Urals and Mesopotamia? In the transformation of languages, the words, milk, whey, and serum stand out in terms of potentially tracking the migration of pastoralist cultures. Note how pastoralist cultures should share the same terms interchangeably. Words included are from the Indo-European Table, including, in addition to the Indo-European, Finnish-Uralic, Baltic, Basque and Georgian languages, these Asian languages are included: Turkish, Gujarati, Kazakh, Uzbek, Tajik, Kyrgyz, Mongolian and Traditional Chinese. The Finnish-Uralic linguistic connections with Persian have been explained through the Sintashta (Persian) fortified towns in the Urals. The Sintashta interchange with the Finns may have involved transmission of metals and products. The Sintashta are also believed from their burials to have been one of the earliest chariot horsemen. The Finns have also many linguistic connections with Akkadian, the language of the Assyrians (in Iraq). They also have strong connections to Hittite.
2011
The journal TURKIC LANGUAGES is devoted to linguistic Turcology. It addresses descriptive, comparative, synchronic, diachronic, theoretical and methodological problems of the study of Turkic languages including questions of genealogical, typological and areal relations, linguistic variation and language acquisition. The journal aims at presenting work of current interest on a variety of subjects and thus welcomes con tributions on all aspects of Turkic linguistics. It contains articles, review articles, re views, discussions, reports, and surveys of publications. It is published in one vo lume of two issues per year with approximately 300 pages.
PERSIAN, DARI AND TAJIK IN CENTRAL ASIA
2005
There have been a number of informal debates among Persian language specialists concerning the status of Tajik and Dari vs. standard Persian. All linguists know that speech communities utilize a continuum of varieties of speech, and that the term "language" is more a political appellation than a scientifically accurate descriptor. The range of variation in Persian, Dari and Tajik communities is quite extensive, embodying regionalisms and borrowings from other language families. The term "register" has a special status in describing languages in that it represents a speech variety that is marked for particular specific occasions. Whereas Modern Persian and Dari are very close in form, Tajik has more divergent discourse structures. Based on fieldwork carried out in Tajikistan, I theorize that standard Persian as spoken in Iran has become a special register of Tajik marked for formal occasions such as political speech making, wedding orations, news broadcasts, and elevated scientific discourse. In this way the opposition between all the varieties of colloquial Tajik and standard Persian in Tajikistan resemble the diglossic opposition between dhimotiki and katherevusa in modern Greek. In this paper I will provide several examples, and speculate on the concretization and meaning of such diglossic vocal speech registers.
JofEL/TDD Journal of Endagered Languages: Turkic Languges - BASHKIR FILE(Contents)
TEHLİKEDEKİ DİLLER DERGİSİ-TÜRK DİLLERİ (TDD) JOURNAL OF ENDANGERED LANGUAGES-TURKIC LANGUAGES (JofEL) Cilt/Volume 4, Sayı/Issue 4, Kış/Winter 2014 Yılda iki kez yayımlanan, az konuşurlu Türk toplulukları ve komşu/akraba topluluklarla ilgili dilbilim, toplumdilbilim, antropoloji ve kültüroloji yazılarına açık uluslararası hakemli elektronik dergi. Dergimize gönderilen makalelerin özgün ve yayımlanmamış olduğunu garanti etmek yazarların sorumluluğundadır. An international peer-reviewed and bi-annual e-journal publishing linguistic, sociolinguistic, anthropological and culturological studies on the lesser spoken languages of the Turkic and related communities. It is the authors' responsibility to ensure that submitted manuscripts are original and unpublished publications.