Altayistikte Bir Ünsüz Yarılması: *L/# Döngüsü

Year 2023, , 87 - 101, 27.01.2023

Mehmet Hazar

https://doi.org/10.35236/jots.1213972

Abstract

The development of this consonant l > ş and r > z has been sufficiently studied in sound equivalence studies, but *l1 < *l/# > l2 > r2 consonant splitting has not been given much attention. The development of this consonant l > ş and r > z has been sufficiently studied in sound equivalence studies, but *l1 < *l/# > l2 > r2 consonant splitting has not been given much attention. This sound splitting ø < s < ş (< j ) < ç < l1 < *l > l2 > r > z > s > ø shaped development that can be called “L Cycle” will bring the issue of LIR and SAZ back to the agenda of Turcology. The three most difficult to study number names are a characteristic example: Manç. (j)il+an “3”, Moğ. guraw “three” ~ Moğ. kur+ban ‘hree’ < AA *ĝīl2+am > Çuv. weç(im) ‘three’ ~ vişşe, TT øüçø, *gul2am > *øulçam > *øøçam > Kor. san -not set- and Tuv. üj+en, Şor. üj+on ‘3 x 10’ -with diphthong- Kor. seol+eun ‘3 x 10’ -, Jap. san 三; -labial acration with instrumental- Hak. üz(öl+en) ‘three together’ -when the plural suffix loses its function, the suffix begins to accumulate-, Başk. ös, Karaçay-Balkar üč юч, Özb. uch, Tat. öç < üç, Kzk. üş ve Mac. hár+om ‘three’. As a result, the Altaic language theory is no longer a theory but a reality.

Keywords

Altaic, Dolgan, Hungarian, consonant splitting, sigmatism, stirrup (= üzengi)

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

-

Thanks

-

Form by Splitting the Cycle of *#L Consonant in Altaistics

Abstract

The development of this consonant l > ş and r > z has been sufficiently studied in sound equivalence studies, but *l1 < *l/# > l2 > r2 consonant splitting has not been given much attention. The development of this consonant l > ş and r > z has been sufficiently studied in sound equivalence studies, but *l1 < *l/# > l2 > r2 consonant splitting has not been given much attention. This sound splitting ø < s < ş (< j ) < ç < l1 < *l > l2 > r > z > s > ø shaped development that can be called “L Cycle” will bring the issue of LIR and SAZ back to the agenda of Turcology. The three most difficult to study number names are a characteristic example: Manç. (j)il+an “3”, Moğ. guraw “three” ~ Moğ. kur+ban ‘hree’ < AA *ĝīl2+am > Çuv. weç(im) ‘three’ ~ vişşe, TT øüçø, *gul2am > *øulçam > *øøçam > Kor. san -not set- and Tuv. üj+en, Şor. üj+on ‘3 x 10’ -with diphthong- Kor. seol+eun ‘3 x 10’ -, Jap. san 三; -labial acration with instrumental- Hak. üz(öl+en) ‘three together’ -when the plural suffix loses its function, the suffix begins to accumulate-, Başk. ös, Karaçay-Balkar üč юч, Özb. uch, Tat. öç < üç, Kzk. üş ve Mac. hár+om ‘three’. As a result, the Altaic language theory is no longer a theory but a reality.

Keywords

Altaic, Dolgan, Hungarian, consonant splitting, sigmatism, stirrup (= üzengi)

Project Number

-

References

• Aalto, P. (1955). On the Altaic Initial ‘*p-’. Central Asiatic Journal, 1(1), 9-16.
• Atmaca, E. & Adzhumerova, R. (2010). ‘Kapı ve eşik’ Kelimeleri Üzerine. Sakarya Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Dergisi, 2, 23-45.
• Balažek, Václav (2019). Altaic Languages. History of research, survey, classification, and a sketch of comparative grammar. Brno: Masaryk University Press.
• Barutçu-Özönder, S. (2002). Türk Dilinin Tarihî Dönemleri Üzerine Birkaç Söz. Türkbilig, 3, 203-210.
• Beyhakî, Ebu’l-Fazl Muhammed b. Hüseyin (1352). Tarih-i Beyhakî II. (Neşr. Said Nefîsî), Tahran.
• Ceylan, E. (1997). Çuvaşça Çok Zamanlı Ses Bilgisi. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Choi, H. W. (2019). Türkçe, Korece, Moğolca ve Mançu-Tunguzcanın Karşılaştırmalı Ses ve Biçim Bilgisi. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Demir, N. & Yılmaz, E. (2014). Türk Dili El Kitabı, (7. baskı). Ankara: Grafiker Yayınları.
• Doerfer, G. (1985). The Mongol Tungus-Connections. Language Research, 2 (2), 135-144.
• Doerfer, G. (1993). Versuch einer linguistischen Datierung alterer osttürkischer Texte. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
• Dumézil, G. (1955). Remarques complémentaires sur les six premiers noms de nombres du turc et du quechua. Journal de la Société des Américanistes, 44: 17-34.
• Eker, S. (2004). Talat Tekin, Makaleler 1, Altayistik. Yay. Yılmaz, E. & Demir, N. Grafiker Yayıncılık: 11, Araştırma İnceleme Dizisi: 5, Ankara 2003, XVI + 384s. Bilig: Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Bahar, 29, 228-244.
• Erdal, M. (2004). Türkçenin Hurriceyle Paylaştığı Tipolojik Ayrıntılar. In V. Uluslararası Türk Dil Kurultayı Bildirileri I 20-26 Eylül 2004, Ankara (pp. 256-276). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Güzelsoy, Y. (2020). Taşı Kesen ‘Yarlıg’. (bilimdili.com, 12.10.2020)
• Habijanova, G. & Omarbekov, T. (2008). Kіrіspe, Kazak Ru-Taypalarının Tarihî XІІ. Kanlı. Alma-Ata: Nauka.
• Helimsky, E. (1992). Gerhard Doerfer, Grundwort und Sprachmischung. Eine Untersuchung an Hand von Körperteilbezeichnungen. Münchener Ostasiatische Studien, 43(2), 322-330.
• Karaağaç, G. (2008). Türkçe Verintiler Sözlüğü. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Kononov, A. N. (1958). Rodoslovnaya Turkmen, Soçineniya Abu-l-Gazi-Hana Hivinskogo. Moskva-Leningrad: Nauka.
• Mikhaĭlov, M. (1930). Matériaux sur L'argot et les Locutions Popularies Turc-Ottomans. Leipzig: Verlag von Eduard Pfeiffer.
• Nalbant, B. Ö. (2010). Oğuz Sözcüğünün Kökeni Üzerine Düşünceler. Türkbilig, 20, 47-59.
• Omarbekov, T. et al. (2017). Kazak Türklerinin Oluşumunda Oğuzların Rolü: Etnik ve Coğrafi Bütünleşme. Millî Folklor, 20(113), 79-92.
• Ölmez, M. (1998). Potanin’s Yellow Uigur Material and its Importance Today, Language and Culture of Turkic Peoples. In Stachowski, M. (Ed.), Studia Turcologica Cracoviensia 5 (pp. 149-182). Kraków.
• Özalan, U. (2021). Tarihî Bakımdan Cürçence-Mançuca İlişkisi ve Cürçencedeki Bazı Türkçe Kökenli Kelimeler Üzerine. Dil Araştırmaları, 15(29), 67-77.
• Róna-Tas, A. (1986). Language and History Contributions to Comparative Altaistics. Budapest: Szeged.
• Saltoğlu, C. (2020). Türkçe Sayı Adları Üzerine. (Acedemia, 06.06.2021).
• Sertkaya, O. F. (1992). The Turkic loan words in middle Mongolian. Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı-Belleten, 35, 265-280.
• Starostin, S. A. et al. (2003). Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages I-III, Leiden-Boston: Brill.
• Street, J. C. (1985) Japanese reflexes of the Proto-Altaic lateral. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 105(4), 637-651.
• Tekin, T. (2003). Makaleler I: Altayistik. Yay. Yılmaz, E. & Demir, N. Ankara: Grafiker Yayıncılık.
• Therien, T. L. (1999). Chickens and eggs: the undying issue of the primacy of r/l or z/š in Altaic historical linguistics. Calgary (Working) Papers in Linguistics, 21, 96-117.
• Tóth, A. (2007). Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian (EDH). The Hague, Holland: Mikes International.
• Tuna, O. N. (1990). Sümer ve Türk Dillerinin Târihî İlgisi ile Türk Dili’nin Yaşı Meselesi. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Ünal, O. (2022). On *p- and other proto-Turkic consonants. Sino-Platonic Papers, 325, 1-95.
• Zimonyi, I. (2021). The spread of the Iron stirrup along the Silk Road. In Zimonyi, I. (Ed.), Altaic and Chagatay Lectures: Studies in Honour of Éva Kincses-Nagy (pp. 479-495). Szeged: University of Szeged.