On the Beginnings of the Formation of the Bashkir Language
In: International Journal of Eurasian LinguisticsSearch for other papers by Klára Agyagási in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
The article has two aims. The first is to show on what historical and methodological basis it is possible to link the history of the Kipchak type Bashkir language in the Volga-Kama region with the pre-Mongol trends of phonetic and phonological changes in certain Middle Turkic varieties. The second one is to outline a possible framework for Bashkir–Volga Bulgarian language contacts. The main results of the paper are as follows: The history of Turkic languages is not a linear order of descent. The occurance of some Kipchak tribal names among them the ethnonym Bashkir in written sources of the 11th century does not mean the existence of a homogeneous Bashkir ethnic community speaking its own Bashkir language before the 13th century. The formation of the Bashkir language has begun in the 13th century and it was determined by three factors: the ongoing tendencies of change initiated on the basis of the multiple Kipchak varieties of the South-Russian steppe; the tendencies of change in linguistic area of the Volga-Kama region; and the modifying influence of substrate language elements. The author analyzing the spelling of the Codex Cumanicus, (the early 13th century source of Kipchak language varieties) points out threefold phonological change of word medial and word final /g/, having regular correspondences up to the contemporary Bashkir. She calls also attention to a specific feature of the spelling of the Codex: the unmarked lack of the vowel i/ï in non-first syllable structures which is interpreted as presence of the vowel reduction on the phonetic level. Concerning the Bashkir-Volga Bulgarian language contact she comes to the conclusion that in lexical copies not a direct Volga Bulgharian → Bashkir interaction took place, but the transmission of the substrate language lexical elements of the dominant language (Central Kazan Tatar), sometimes Volga Bulgharian, into the ancestor of Bashkir. The substrate influence of the Eastern Volga Bulgharian dialect can be seen as a phonemicization of the reduction of closed vowels in Early Middle Bashkir.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Agyagási, Klára. [К. Адягаши] 2005. Ранние русские заимствования тюркских языков Волго-Камского ареала. [Early Russian loanwords in the Turkic languages of the Volga-Kama area] Studies in Linguistics of the Volga-Region I. Debrecen: Kossuth Egyetemi Kiadó.
-
Agyagási, Klára. 2007. Mittelbulgarische Dialekte – mittelbulgarischer Sprachzustand. In: Boeschoten, H.& Stein, H. (eds.) Einheit und Vielfalt in der türkischen Welt. Turcologica 69. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 24–36.
-
Agyagási, Klára. 2019. Chuvash Historical Phonetics. An area linguistic study with an Appendix on the role of Proto-Mari in the history of Chuvash vocalism. Turcologica 117. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
-
Agyagási, Klára. 2021. A központi kazányi tatár nyelvjárás volgai bulgár elemeinek kontaktusnyelvészeti státuszához. [On the contact linguistic status of the Volga Bulgharian elements of the Central Kazan Tatar dialect] Keletkutatás (ősz): 25–34.
-
Agyagási, Klára. (in press). Areal contacts in the Volga-Ural region. In: Johanson, Lars (ed.) Encyclopedia of the Turkic languages and linguistics. Online. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
-
Bálint Szentkatolnai, Gábor. 1876. Kazáni-tatár nyelvtanulmányok II. füzet. Kazáni-tatár szótár. [Kazan Tatar Studies. Part II. Kazan Tatar Dictionary] Budapest: A.M.T. Akadémiai Könyvkiadó Hivatalában.
-
Benzing, Johannes. 1959. Das Baschkirische. In: Deny, Jean; Grønbech, Kaare & Scheel, Helmuth (eds.) Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta. Wiesbaden: Steiner. 421–434.
-
Berta, Árpád. 1989. Lautgeschichte der tatarischen Dialekte. Studia Uralo-Altaica 31. Szeged: Universitas Szegediensis de Attila József nominata.
-
Berta, Árpád. 1996. Deverbale Wortbildung im Mittelkiptschakish-Türkischen. Turcologica 24. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
-
Berta, Árpád. 2022 2. Tatar and Bashkir. In: Johanson, L. & Csató, É.Á. (eds.) The Turkic languages. London and New York: Routledge. 303–319.
-
Clauson, sir Gerhard. 1972. An etymological dictionary of pre-thirteenth-century Turkish. Oxford: Clarendon.
-
Dankoff, Robert & Kelly, James M. (eds.) 1982. Maḥmūd al Kāšγarī: Compendium of the Turkic dialects (Dīwān Luγāt at-Turk) I. Duxbury, Mass.: Harvard University.
-
Drimba, Vladimir. 2000. Codex Cumanicus. Édition diplomatique avec fac-similés. Bucaraest: Editura Enciclopediă.
-
DTS1969= Nadeljaev, V. M. et al. [Наделяев В.М. и др.] (ed.) Древнетюркский словарь. [Old Turkic Dictionary] Ленингад [Leningrad]: Nauka.
-
Dybo, Anna V. [А.В. Дыбо] & Hisamitdinova, F.G. [Ф.Г. Хисамитдинова] 2009. Башкирский язык в системе алтайских языков. [The Bashkir language in the system of the Altaic languages] Проблемы востоковедения [Problemy vostokevedenija] 4/46: 109–115.
-
Eleusin, Arman. 2020. Studien zum Mischär-Tatarischen. Turcologica 124. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
-
Erdal, Marcel. 2004. A grammar of Old Turkic. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
-
Gabain von, Annemarie. 1959. Die Sprache des Codex Cumanicus. In: Deny, Jean; Grønbech, Kaare & Scheel, Helmuth (eds.) Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta. Wiesbaden: Steiner. 46–73.
-
Garipov, Talmas M. [Т. М. Гарипов] 1976. Существовал ли пракыпчакский язык? (В связи с установлением основных типов и направлений вокалических изменений в истории кыпчакских языков Урало-Поволжья) [Did the Proto-Kipchak language exist? In connection with the determination of the basic types and directions of changes of vowels in the history of Kipchak languages of the Volga-Ural region. In: Káldy-Nagy, Gyula (ed.) Hungaro-Turcica. Studies in honour of Julius Németh. Budapest: Loránd Eötvös University. 163–168.
-
Garipov, Talmas M. [Т. М. Гарипов] 1979. Кыпчакские языки Урало-Поволжья. [Kipchak languages of the Volga-Ural region] Moscow [Москва]: Nauka.
-
Golden, Peter B. 1992. An introduction to the history of the Turkic peoples. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
-
Golden, Peter B. 2005. The shaping of the Cuman-Qïpchaqs and their world. In: Schmieder, Felicitas & Schreiner, Peter (eds.) Il Codice Cumanico e il suo mondo. Atti del colloqio internazionale. Aevi Vol. 14. 281–298.
-
Golden, Peter B. 2011. The Codex Cumanicus. In: Paksoy, Hasan B. (ed.) Central Asian Monuments. Istanbul: Isis Press. Online available: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/131202541.pdf (last accessed on 22.01.2024).
-
Golev, Konstantin 2018. The Cuman-Qīpčaqs and Crimea: The role of the peninsula in the nomads’relation with the outside world. Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 24: 23–108.
-
Grønbech, Kaare. (ed.) 1936. Codex Cumanicus. Cod. Marc. Lat. DXLIX. Kopenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.
-
Grønbech, Kaare. 1942. Komanisches Wörterbuch. Türkischer Wortindex zu Codex Cumanicus. Kopenhagen: Einar Munksgaard.
-
Grunin, T. I. [Грунин, Т.И.] 1967. Документы на половецком языке XVI века. (Судебные акты Каменец-Подольской армянской общности Я.Р. Дащкевича). [Documents in 16th century Polovets language. Judicial documents of the Kamenets-Podolsk Armenian community by Ya. Dashkevitch] Pamjatniki vostoka 3 [Памятники письменности востока 3] Moscow [Москва]: Nauka.
-
Güney, Fatma Şahan. 2023. Is the Volga Vowel Shift Turkic Induced? Further Evidence from Caucasian Turkic Languages. In: Güven, Funda & Güney, Fatma Şahan (eds.) A Long Scholarly Jouney From New York top Eurasia. A Festschrift in Honour of Uli Schamiloglu. Turko-Tatar Press: Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Online available: https://www.academia.edu/34520270/Is_Volga_Vowel_Shift_Turkic_Induced_Further_Evidence_from_Caucasian_Turkic_Languages (last accessed on 19.03.2024).
-
Hakimzyanov, Farid S. [Ф.С. Хакимзянов] 1987. Эпиграфические памятники Волжской Булгарии и их язык. [Volga-Bulgarian epigraphs and their language] Moscow [Москва]: Nauka.
-
Johanson, Lars 2000. Linguistic convergence in the Volga Area. In: Gilbers, D., Nerbonne, J. & Schaeken, J. (eds.) Language in Contact. Rodopi: Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA. 165–178.
-
Johanson, Lars. 2022. The history of Turkic. In: Johanson, Lars & Csató, Éva Á. (eds.) The Turkic languages. London and New York: Routledge. 81–120.
-
Kakuk, Susan. 1982. The Hungarian historical etymological dictionary and Chuvash phonology. In: Róna-Tas, A. (ed.) Chuvash Studies. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 83–95.
-
Moriyasu, Takao & Ochir, Ayudai (eds.) 1999. Provisional report of researches on historical sites and inscriptions in Mongolia from 1996 to 1998. Osaka: The Society of Central Eurasian Studies.
-
Musayev, K.M. [К.М. Мусаев] 2002. Кыпчакская группа. [The Kipchak group] In: Tenišev, Edhjam R. [Тенишев, Эдхям Р.] (ed.) Сравнительно-историческая грамматика тюркскиx языков. Региональные реконструкции. [Comparative- historical grammar of the Turkic languages] Moscow [Mосква]: Nauka. 259–298.
-
Rédei, Károly & Róna-Tas, András. 1983. Early Bulgarian loanwords in the Permian languages. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 37: 3–41.
-
Róna-Tas, András. 1976. Some Volga Bulgarian words in the Volga Kipchak languages. In: Káldy-Nagy, Gyula (ed.) Hungaro-Turcica. Studies in honour of Julius Németh. Budapest: Loránd Eötvös University. 169–175.
-
Róna-Tas, András. 1982. Loan-words of ultimate Middle Mongolian origin in the Volga Kipchak languages. In: Róna-Tas, András (ed.) Studies in Chuvash Etymology I. Studia Uralo-Altaica 17. Szeged: JATE press. 66–134.
-
Róna-Tas, András. (ed.) 1986. Language and history. Contributions to Comparative Altaistics. Studia Uralo-Altaica 25. Szeged: JATE press.
-
Róna-Tas, András. 1996. A honfoglaló magyar nép. [The conquering Hungarian people]. Budapest: Balassi kiadó.
-
Róna-Tas, András. 2022 2. The reconstruction of Proto-Turkic and the genealogical question. In: Johanson, Lars & Csató, Éva Á. (eds.) The Turkic languages. London & New York: Routledge. 60–74.
-
Róna-Tas, András & Berta, Árpád. 2011. West Old Turkic: Turkic loanwords in Hungarian. Parts I–II. Turcologica 84. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
-
Rudenko, Konstantin A. [Руденко, Константин А.] 2014. Истоpия археологического изучения Волжской Булгарии (Х–начало XIII в.). [The history of the archeological research of Volga-Bulgaria] Kazan’ [Казань]: GBU.
-
Schütz, Edmond. 1968. An Armeno Kipchak Chronicle on Polish-Turkish Wars in 1620–1621. Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica 11. Budapest: Akadémiai kiadó.
-
Schütz, Edmond. 1998. Armeno-Turcica: Selected Studies. Bloomington: Indiana University.
-
Shcherbak, Aleksandr M. [Щербак, Александр М.] 1970. Сравнительная фонетика тюркских языков. [Comparative phonetics of the Turkic languages] Leningrad [Ленинград]: Nauka.
-
Sevortyan, Ervand V. [Севортян Эрванд В.] 1974–1980. Этимологический словарь тюркских языков. [Etymological dictionary of Turkic languages] 1–3. Moscow [Москва]: Nauka.
-
Tekin, Talat. 1987. On the History of the Labial Vowel Shifts in Tatar and Bashkir. In: Tukain, Abdulla (ed.) Tatarica. Studia in honorem Ymär Daher. Helsinki: Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy. 293–306.
-
Tenišev, Edhjam R. [Тенишев, Эдхям Р.] 1988. Сравнительно-историческая грамматика тюркских языков. Морфология. [Comparative-historical grammar of the Turkic languages. Morphology.] Moscow [Москва]: Nauka.
-
Togabayeva, Güldana. [Тогабаева, Гүлдана] (in print) Этнонимы венгров в постзолотоордынских источниках. [Ethnonyms of Hungarians in sources written after the period of the Golden Horde]. Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi.
-
Uraksin, Z.G. [Ураксин, З.Г.] (ed.) 1996. Башкирско-русский словарь. [Bashkir-Russian dictionary] Moscow [Москва]: Russkij yazyk.
-
Valiyeva, Madina R. [Валиева, Мадина Р.] 2016.
Пpоблема булгарского влияния на развитие башкирского языка . [The problem of the Bulgharian influence on development of the Bashkir language] Диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата наук. На правах рукописи. [PhD dissertation] Ufa [Уфа]: Institut istorii jazyka i literatury Ufimskogo naučnogo centra RAN. -
Vásáry, István. 2008. Julianus magyarjai a mongolkor után: možarok és mišerek (meščerek) a Közép-Volga vidékén. [Julianus’ Hungarians after the Mongol period: Možars and Meščers in the Middle-Volga region] In: Vásáry, István. Magyar őshazák és Magyar őstörténészek. Magyar Őstörténeti Könyvtár 24. Budapest: Balassi kiadó. 37–72.
-
Wichmann, Yrjo. 1903. Die tschuwaschischen Lehnwörter in den permischen Sprache. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 266 | 192 | 6 |
| Full Text Views | 16 | 10 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 40 | 21 | 0 |
On the Beginnings of the Formation of the Bashkir Language
In: International Journal of Eurasian LinguisticsSearch for other papers by Klára Agyagási in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
The article has two aims. The first is to show on what historical and methodological basis it is possible to link the history of the Kipchak type Bashkir language in the Volga-Kama region with the pre-Mongol trends of phonetic and phonological changes in certain Middle Turkic varieties. The second one is to outline a possible framework for Bashkir–Volga Bulgarian language contacts. The main results of the paper are as follows: The history of Turkic languages is not a linear order of descent. The occurance of some Kipchak tribal names among them the ethnonym Bashkir in written sources of the 11th century does not mean the existence of a homogeneous Bashkir ethnic community speaking its own Bashkir language before the 13th century. The formation of the Bashkir language has begun in the 13th century and it was determined by three factors: the ongoing tendencies of change initiated on the basis of the multiple Kipchak varieties of the South-Russian steppe; the tendencies of change in linguistic area of the Volga-Kama region; and the modifying influence of substrate language elements. The author analyzing the spelling of the Codex Cumanicus, (the early 13th century source of Kipchak language varieties) points out threefold phonological change of word medial and word final /g/, having regular correspondences up to the contemporary Bashkir. She calls also attention to a specific feature of the spelling of the Codex: the unmarked lack of the vowel i/ï in non-first syllable structures which is interpreted as presence of the vowel reduction on the phonetic level. Concerning the Bashkir-Volga Bulgarian language contact she comes to the conclusion that in lexical copies not a direct Volga Bulgharian → Bashkir interaction took place, but the transmission of the substrate language lexical elements of the dominant language (Central Kazan Tatar), sometimes Volga Bulgharian, into the ancestor of Bashkir. The substrate influence of the Eastern Volga Bulgharian dialect can be seen as a phonemicization of the reduction of closed vowels in Early Middle Bashkir.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 266 | 192 | 6 |
| Full Text Views | 16 | 10 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 40 | 21 | 0 |
