Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-106-123
F. Nurieva, Gulnaz N. Fakhretdinova
The article analyzes the language features of Yakov Emelyanov’s collection of “Poems in the Christianized-Tatar language”, published in 1879 for Baptized Tatars. Written manuscripts are one of the main sources for studying the history of the language, however, this collection has not yet been considered. The article analyzes the phonetic, morphological, and lexical features in the text. The language of the poems is compared with the linguistic material of the translated liturgical Cyrillic books, the Tatar literary language and its modern dialects. The results suggest that there are a number of graphic and phonetic features, including rounded vowels, the use of diphthongs and certain vowels and consonants in accordance with the literary variants, and the vowel deletion. The morphological features include the affix -ym, -em instead of the literary first person singular of the future tense with -r, the in-finitive -maga affix instead of the literary -rga, as well as lexical peculiarities that distinguish the poems language from the modern Tatar literary language and some of its dialects. Moreover, all of them are recorded in the Mamadysh and Laishev dialects of the Ta-tar language, the regions where the poet was born and lived. Thus, we can assume that forms of real colloquial words of that time are presented in Yakov Yemelyanov’s poems, and in translated liturgical books, these features were leveled. Analysis of the poems allows observing the history of the Tatar language and its dialects.
{"title":"Стихи и письма Якова Емельянова как источник для изучения языковой нормы татар-кряшен XIX века","authors":"F. Nurieva, Gulnaz N. Fakhretdinova","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-106-123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-106-123","url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the language features of Yakov Emelyanov’s collection of “Poems in the Christianized-Tatar language”, published in 1879 for Baptized Tatars. Written manuscripts are one of the main sources for studying the history of the language, however, this collection has not yet been considered. The article analyzes the phonetic, morphological, and lexical features in the text. The language of the poems is compared with the linguistic material of the translated liturgical Cyrillic books, the Tatar literary language and its modern dialects. The results suggest that there are a number of graphic and phonetic features, including rounded vowels, the use of diphthongs and certain vowels and consonants in accordance with the literary variants, and the vowel deletion. The morphological features include the affix -ym, -em instead of the literary first person singular of the future tense with -r, the in-finitive -maga affix instead of the literary -rga, as well as lexical peculiarities that distinguish the poems language from the modern Tatar literary language and some of its dialects. Moreover, all of them are recorded in the Mamadysh and Laishev dialects of the Ta-tar language, the regions where the poet was born and lived. Thus, we can assume that forms of real colloquial words of that time are presented in Yakov Yemelyanov’s poems, and in translated liturgical books, these features were leveled. Analysis of the poems allows observing the history of the Tatar language and its dialects.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41336963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-49-68
D. Kuzmin
The article discusses a number of issues related to the history of the settlement of south Karelia in the period before the coloni-zation of its territory by modern Karelians. Archaeological evidence suggests that the region of study became inhabited about 9 thousand years ago, and the archaeological cultures emerged here gradually replaced each other throughout this time, up to the era of the Middle Ages. At the same time, researchers cannot determine exactly which languages were spoken by the local populations of the paleo-European archaeological cultures of Fennoscandia, which had been replaced by the ancestors of modern Sami. Thus, the earliest of reliably identifiable strata in the languages and toponymy of the peoples of modern Karelia is of (pre-)Sami origin. Traces of this layer are best preserved in toponymy, as well as in borrowed vocabulary in the Karelian, Vepsian and Russian lan-guages. The Baltic-Finnish population of southern Karelia is also quite ancient, and it originated from the medieval Vepsians, who from the 10th century A. D. began the gradual settlement of the southern parts of Karelia. From the 13th century, the territory of Ka-relia began to be actively colonized by ancient Karelians, whose historic homeland was in the northwestern Ladoga area. Over time, the Ladoga Karelians assimilated both the autochthonous Sami population of Karelia, and most of the Veps who moved here from the Svir river area.
{"title":"Южная Карелия в конце эпохи Средневековья","authors":"D. Kuzmin","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-49-68","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-49-68","url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses a number of issues related to the history of the settlement of south Karelia in the period before the coloni-zation of its territory by modern Karelians. Archaeological evidence suggests that the region of study became inhabited about 9 thousand years ago, and the archaeological cultures emerged here gradually replaced each other throughout this time, up to the era of the Middle Ages. At the same time, researchers cannot determine exactly which languages were spoken by the local populations of the paleo-European archaeological cultures of Fennoscandia, which had been replaced by the ancestors of modern Sami. Thus, the earliest of reliably identifiable strata in the languages and toponymy of the peoples of modern Karelia is of (pre-)Sami origin. Traces of this layer are best preserved in toponymy, as well as in borrowed vocabulary in the Karelian, Vepsian and Russian lan-guages. The Baltic-Finnish population of southern Karelia is also quite ancient, and it originated from the medieval Vepsians, who from the 10th century A. D. began the gradual settlement of the southern parts of Karelia. From the 13th century, the territory of Ka-relia began to be actively colonized by ancient Karelians, whose historic homeland was in the northwestern Ladoga area. Over time, the Ladoga Karelians assimilated both the autochthonous Sami population of Karelia, and most of the Veps who moved here from the Svir river area.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70125514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-35-48
Yuri N. Kvashnin
The article examines the processes of adaptation of the Nenets to new types of dwellings in the extreme east (in the interfluve of the Taz and Yenisei rivers) and the extreme west (in the Kanin tundra) of their territory in the XX — early XXI centuries. The ar-ticle analyzes the problems faced by economic workers in the 1930—1980s, trying to replace the traditional yurts by introducing ar-tificially designed tents, wagons, and trailers into the everyday life of northern nomads. The processes of a difficult, but natural transition of the Taz-Yenisei Nenets from the yurts to the Dolgan-type gullies, and the Kanin Nenets into tents designed by the Ko-mi-Izhemtsy are shown. The transition of the Yenisei Nenets to the gullies might not have taken place if not for the construction of collective farms in the North in the 1930s. The Dolgans were the only nomads who lived in the gullies for almost a century before the establishment of Soviet power. None of the peoples who roamed at that time in the immediate vicinity of them replaced the traditional chums with beams. Only the attempts of Soviet workers to voluntarily improve the nomadic life of reindeer herders made this change possible. Gullies proved to be the most acceptable type of housing to replace the yurts. The transformation of the life of the Nenets of the Kanin tundra began in the 1960s—1980s. The Komi-Izhemtsy became the innovators who radically changed the life of the Kanin reindeer breeders. A tent built in the early 1960s by the late 1980s gradually replaced the yurt. The Nenets resisted this innovation for a long time and gave up only because they saw an important advantage of the tent — the absence of the need to slaughter a large number of reindeer and to engage in labor-intensive manufacturing of skins for tires. The main conclusion of the study is that it is only the conservative thinking that for a long time did not allow the Nenets to change anything in their way of life, including the types of dwellings.
本文考察了二十世纪初涅涅茨人适应其领土最东部（塔兹河和叶尼塞河交汇处）和最西部（卡宁苔原）新型住宅的过程。文章分析了1930年代至1980年代经济工作者面临的问题，试图通过将人工设计的帐篷、马车和拖车引入北方游牧民族的日常生活来取代传统的蒙古包。塔兹-叶尼塞-涅涅茨人从蒙古包到多尔干型沟壑的艰难但自然的过渡过程，以及卡宁-涅涅茨人到Ko mi Izemtsy设计的帐篷的过渡过程。如果不是20世纪30年代在北方建造集体农场，叶尼塞-涅涅茨河向冲沟的过渡可能不会发生。多尔根人是唯一一个在苏联政权建立前在沟壑中生活了近一个世纪的游牧民族。当时在他们附近游荡的人们都没有用横梁取代传统的密友。只有苏联工人自愿改善驯鹿牧民的游牧生活，才有可能实现这一改变。事实证明，水沟是取代蒙古包的最可接受的住房类型。卡宁苔原的涅涅茨人生活的转变始于20世纪60年代至80年代。科米·伊泽姆西成为彻底改变了卡宁驯鹿饲养者生活的创新者。20世纪60年代初至80年代末建造的帐篷逐渐取代了蒙古包。涅涅茨人长期抵制这种创新，之所以放弃，是因为他们看到了帐篷的一个重要优势——不需要屠宰大量驯鹿，也不需要从事劳动密集型的轮胎皮制造。这项研究的主要结论是，这只是一种保守的想法，长期以来，涅涅茨人不允许改变他们的生活方式，包括住宅类型。
{"title":"Балок и палатка — новые жилища на окраинах ненецкой ойкумены","authors":"Yuri N. Kvashnin","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-35-48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-35-48","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the processes of adaptation of the Nenets to new types of dwellings in the extreme east (in the interfluve of the Taz and Yenisei rivers) and the extreme west (in the Kanin tundra) of their territory in the XX — early XXI centuries. The ar-ticle analyzes the problems faced by economic workers in the 1930—1980s, trying to replace the traditional yurts by introducing ar-tificially designed tents, wagons, and trailers into the everyday life of northern nomads. The processes of a difficult, but natural transition of the Taz-Yenisei Nenets from the yurts to the Dolgan-type gullies, and the Kanin Nenets into tents designed by the Ko-mi-Izhemtsy are shown. The transition of the Yenisei Nenets to the gullies might not have taken place if not for the construction of collective farms in the North in the 1930s. The Dolgans were the only nomads who lived in the gullies for almost a century before the establishment of Soviet power. None of the peoples who roamed at that time in the immediate vicinity of them replaced the traditional chums with beams. Only the attempts of Soviet workers to voluntarily improve the nomadic life of reindeer herders made this change possible. Gullies proved to be the most acceptable type of housing to replace the yurts. The transformation of the life of the Nenets of the Kanin tundra began in the 1960s—1980s. The Komi-Izhemtsy became the innovators who radically changed the life of the Kanin reindeer breeders. A tent built in the early 1960s by the late 1980s gradually replaced the yurt. The Nenets resisted this innovation for a long time and gave up only because they saw an important advantage of the tent — the absence of the need to slaughter a large number of reindeer and to engage in labor-intensive manufacturing of skins for tires. The main conclusion of the study is that it is only the conservative thinking that for a long time did not allow the Nenets to change anything in their way of life, including the types of dwellings.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41791331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-7-34
Alexander I. Grishchenko, V. V. Ponaryadov
The paper for the first time publishes monuments of the Old Permian language written with Abur, or the script of St. Stephen of Perm; these sources are previously unknown or have not been introduced into academic circulation. They are published here as fac-similes, with transliteration, transcription, and Russian translation. Perhaps the oldest of these inscriptions (from the 1460s — the early 1470s?) is the postscript written in a mixture of Old Permian and Russian at the end of the Church Slavonic Homilae by St. Gregory the Great: it was copied in the Ferapontov Monastery, in the White Lake area, perhaps by the hand of St. Martinianus of White Lake (Belozersky). The next earliest of the Old Permian documents — and the earliest to be dated precisely — is scribal mar-ginalia on a manuscript book with the spiritual homilies of St. Isaac the Syrian in a Church Slavonic translation; it was copied in Ust-Vym (the Komi area) in 1486 by Gabriel (Gavrila) the Deacon (Ki̮ldaś). Other Old Permian postscripts were made at the court of the archbishop of Novgorod the Great in the early 1490s in two volumes with the new Church Slavonic translations from the Vulgate; they were prepared in the circle of Archbishop Gennady of Novgorod and Pskov. Finally, the last word of the late 15th — early 16th century inscription in the Church Slavonic Corpus Areopagiticum has been re-attributed as Old Permian rather than Slavic cryptog-raphy in Abur; this book was donated to the Annunciation Church of Ust-Vym by St. Pitirim, bishop of Perm. The total number of new texts is 37 word-forms, including lexemes that were not previously recorded for this period — this is significant for the Old Permian corpus of the 15th — early 16th centuries. Although from the graphic, phonetic, grammatical, and lexical points of view, these texts basically represent the same linguistic system found in previously known Old Permian monu-ments, they demonstrate, on the one hand, the inclusion of Old Permian scribes into the activities of professional Old Russian scrip-toria and, on the other, they testify to the emergence of interest on the part of East Slavic bookmen in “indigenous” languages. Knowing these languages could be a sign of belonging to a special intellectual stratum that included both the creators of the first Church Slavonic complete biblical collection (the Gennady Bible) and members of the so-called heresy of the Judaizers.
该报首次出版了用阿布尔（Abur）或彼尔姆圣斯蒂芬（St.Stephen of Perm）书写的古二叠纪语言纪念碑；这些来源以前是未知的，或者没有被引入学术流通。它们在这里以传真的形式出版，有音译、转写和俄语翻译。也许这些铭文中最古老的（从1460年代到1470年代初？）是圣格雷戈里大帝在斯拉夫人纪念日教堂结束时用古二叠纪和俄语混合写的后记：它是在白湖地区的费拉蓬托夫修道院复制的，可能是由白湖的圣马提尼亚努斯（Belozersky）之手复制的。下一个最早的古二叠纪文献——也是最早被精确确定日期的文献——是在一本手稿书上写下了叙利亚圣艾萨克的精神布道，这本手稿是教会斯拉夫语翻译的；1486年，执事Gabriel（Gavrila）（Ki̮ldaś）在Ust Vym（科米地区）复制了它。其他旧二叠纪的题跋是在1490年代初在诺夫哥罗德大主教的宫廷上制作的，分为两卷，其中有来自Vulgate的新教会斯拉夫语译本；它们是在诺夫哥罗德大主教根纳迪和普斯科夫的圈子里准备的。最后，教会斯拉夫语语料库中15世纪末至16世纪初铭文的最后一个单词Areopagiticum在Abur中被重新归类为旧二叠纪，而不是斯拉夫语密码学；这本书是由彼尔姆主教圣皮蒂里姆捐赠给乌斯特维姆报喜教堂的。新文本的总数为37种单词形式，包括这一时期以前没有记录的单词——这对15世纪至16世纪初的旧二叠纪语料库来说意义重大。尽管从图形、语音、语法和词汇的角度来看，这些文本基本上代表了以前已知的古二叠纪世界中发现的相同的语言系统，但它们一方面表明，古二叠纪抄写员被纳入了古俄罗斯专业抄写员的活动中，另一方面，它们证明了东斯拉夫书商对“土著”语言的兴趣的出现。了解这些语言可能是属于一个特殊知识阶层的标志，这个阶层既包括第一本教会斯拉夫语完整圣经集（根纳季圣经）的创造者，也包括所谓犹太异端的成员。
{"title":"Новые находки памятников древнепермского языка и письма","authors":"Alexander I. Grishchenko, V. V. Ponaryadov","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-7-34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-43-4-7-34","url":null,"abstract":"The paper for the first time publishes monuments of the Old Permian language written with Abur, or the script of St. Stephen of Perm; these sources are previously unknown or have not been introduced into academic circulation. They are published here as fac-similes, with transliteration, transcription, and Russian translation. Perhaps the oldest of these inscriptions (from the 1460s — the early 1470s?) is the postscript written in a mixture of Old Permian and Russian at the end of the Church Slavonic Homilae by St. Gregory the Great: it was copied in the Ferapontov Monastery, in the White Lake area, perhaps by the hand of St. Martinianus of White Lake (Belozersky). The next earliest of the Old Permian documents — and the earliest to be dated precisely — is scribal mar-ginalia on a manuscript book with the spiritual homilies of St. Isaac the Syrian in a Church Slavonic translation; it was copied in Ust-Vym (the Komi area) in 1486 by Gabriel (Gavrila) the Deacon (Ki̮ldaś). Other Old Permian postscripts were made at the court of the archbishop of Novgorod the Great in the early 1490s in two volumes with the new Church Slavonic translations from the Vulgate; they were prepared in the circle of Archbishop Gennady of Novgorod and Pskov. Finally, the last word of the late 15th — early 16th century inscription in the Church Slavonic Corpus Areopagiticum has been re-attributed as Old Permian rather than Slavic cryptog-raphy in Abur; this book was donated to the Annunciation Church of Ust-Vym by St. Pitirim, bishop of Perm. The total number of new texts is 37 word-forms, including lexemes that were not previously recorded for this period — this is significant for the Old Permian corpus of the 15th — early 16th centuries. Although from the graphic, phonetic, grammatical, and lexical points of view, these texts basically represent the same linguistic system found in previously known Old Permian monu-ments, they demonstrate, on the one hand, the inclusion of Old Permian scribes into the activities of professional Old Russian scrip-toria and, on the other, they testify to the emergence of interest on the part of East Slavic bookmen in “indigenous” languages. Knowing these languages could be a sign of belonging to a special intellectual stratum that included both the creators of the first Church Slavonic complete biblical collection (the Gennady Bible) and members of the so-called heresy of the Judaizers.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45861505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-85-89
L. Ivshin
This publication is a review of a new book by O. A. Sergeev, which presents a historical, linguistic and paleographic analysis of the handwritten Mari-Russian dictionary of the second half of the 18th century by V. Kreknin and I. Platunov. This is the second scientific reference edition of the author related to the series “From the history of Russian lexicography”. It introduces the reader to the history of the creation, dialect and lexical features of a unique bicentenary lexicographic work. As an appendix, the monograph contains a “Brief Cheremis Dictionary with a Russian translation” with the use of modern Mari language data. Thus, materials on the Mari language of the end of the 18th century will become available to a wide range of readers. The publication of handwritten works becomes relevant due to the increased interest of researchers in the study of the history of the language, the problems of the emergence and development of writing, and the literary language in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The development of these tasks requires a broad involvement of handwritten and published works in the scientific circulation, which for many languages, including Mari, are one of the most important sources that recreate a more or less complete picture of the language development (graphics, spelling, punctuation, vocabulary) at a certain stage. The book by O. A. Sergeev is a valuable research that is of great interest, first of all, for students of philology and graduate students as a textbook for studying the course of the history of the Mari literary language and / or linguistics. It can be used by researcherstheorists in the field of Finno-Ugric linguistics, as well as by all those interested in the material and spiritual culture of the Mari people.
{"title":"Новая жизнь уникальной рукописи (О. А. Сергеев. Василий Крекнин, Иоанн Платунов «Краткой черемиской словарь с российским переводом»: лингвистический анализ (с приложением словаря). Йошкар-Ола, 2020. 348 с.)","authors":"L. Ivshin","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-85-89","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-85-89","url":null,"abstract":"This publication is a review of a new book by O. A. Sergeev, which presents a historical, linguistic and paleographic analysis of the handwritten Mari-Russian dictionary of the second half of the 18th century by V. Kreknin and I. Platunov. This is the second scientific reference edition of the author related to the series “From the history of Russian lexicography”. It introduces the reader to the history of the creation, dialect and lexical features of a unique bicentenary lexicographic work. As an appendix, the monograph contains a “Brief Cheremis Dictionary with a Russian translation” with the use of modern Mari language data. Thus, materials on the Mari language of the end of the 18th century will become available to a wide range of readers. The publication of handwritten works becomes relevant due to the increased interest of researchers in the study of the history of the language, the problems of the emergence and development of writing, and the literary language in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The development of these tasks requires a broad involvement of handwritten and published works in the scientific circulation, which for many languages, including Mari, are one of the most important sources that recreate a more or less complete picture of the language development (graphics, spelling, punctuation, vocabulary) at a certain stage. The book by O. A. Sergeev is a valuable research that is of great interest, first of all, for students of philology and graduate students as a textbook for studying the course of the history of the Mari literary language and / or linguistics. It can be used by researcherstheorists in the field of Finno-Ugric linguistics, as well as by all those interested in the material and spiritual culture of the Mari people.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42789547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-7-18
Nurlan A. Atygayev
The article is devoted to the study of the term and ethnonym Qazaq/Kazakh, which is the ethnic name of the main population of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The article suggests that the term Qazaq comes from the Turkic verb qaz- ‘dig’. Perhaps this term meant young Turkic people who switched to qazaqliq (free, or qazaq style of living), and, unlike the nomadic Kipchaks, used to live not in yurts, but in dugouts that they themselves dug up in forest and mountain ranges. The following stages in the development of the term qazaq/Qazaq in East Desht-i Qipchaq of the 13th—14th centuries are highlighted. 1. In the 13th — the 2nd half of the 14th century, the word qazaq was applied to unmarried young people who temporarily broke off ties with their relatives and went to remote places, where they passed a kind of a school of survival. The term qazaqliq denoted the custom of “bravery and courage”. 2. From the 2nd half of the 14th century to 1465, in East Desht-i Qipchaq (and in the former Chagatai ulus) the word qazaq was primarily applied to Chingizids, who in the conditions of political struggle were forced to abandon their original possessions and take up the qazaqliq. The term qazaqliq denoted the method of political struggle, widespread among the Chingizids, as well as the custom of “bravery and courage” as before. 3. From 1465 to the end of the 15th century, with the foundation of an independent state between Shu and Ili rivers, their neighbors began to call its subjects Qazaqs, and the term became a politonym. 4. From the end of the 15th century until the middle of the 16th century, the ethno-political division of Uzbek Ulus took place. Three ethnopolitical communities originating from Uzbek Ulus emerged: Nogai, Shiban Uzbeks, and Qazaqs. During this period, the term qazaq became an ethno-politonym. 5. From the middle of the 16th century till today, the terms Qazaq/Kazakh and Аlash began to reflect the selfidentification of the population of the Kazakh Khanate, Kazakhstan, and the term Qazaq/Kazakh has acquired an ethnic meaning and started to be used as an ethnonym to refer to the population of the Kazakh Khanate.
{"title":"Трансформация семантики термина и этнонима қазақ (قزاق/qazaq/казах) в Восточном Дешт-и Кыпчаке","authors":"Nurlan A. Atygayev","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-7-18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-7-18","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the study of the term and ethnonym Qazaq/Kazakh, which is the ethnic name of the main population of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The article suggests that the term Qazaq comes from the Turkic verb qaz- ‘dig’. Perhaps this term meant young Turkic people who switched to qazaqliq (free, or qazaq style of living), and, unlike the nomadic Kipchaks, used to live not in yurts, but in dugouts that they themselves dug up in forest and mountain ranges. The following stages in the development of the term qazaq/Qazaq in East Desht-i Qipchaq of the 13th—14th centuries are highlighted. 1. In the 13th — the 2nd half of the 14th century, the word qazaq was applied to unmarried young people who temporarily broke off ties with their relatives and went to remote places, where they passed a kind of a school of survival. The term qazaqliq denoted the custom of “bravery and courage”. 2. From the 2nd half of the 14th century to 1465, in East Desht-i Qipchaq (and in the former Chagatai ulus) the word qazaq was primarily applied to Chingizids, who in the conditions of political struggle were forced to abandon their original possessions and take up the qazaqliq. The term qazaqliq denoted the method of political struggle, widespread among the Chingizids, as well as the custom of “bravery and courage” as before. 3. From 1465 to the end of the 15th century, with the foundation of an independent state between Shu and Ili rivers, their neighbors began to call its subjects Qazaqs, and the term became a politonym. 4. From the end of the 15th century until the middle of the 16th century, the ethno-political division of Uzbek Ulus took place. Three ethnopolitical communities originating from Uzbek Ulus emerged: Nogai, Shiban Uzbeks, and Qazaqs. During this period, the term qazaq became an ethno-politonym. 5. From the middle of the 16th century till today, the terms Qazaq/Kazakh and Аlash began to reflect the selfidentification of the population of the Kazakh Khanate, Kazakhstan, and the term Qazaq/Kazakh has acquired an ethnic meaning and started to be used as an ethnonym to refer to the population of the Kazakh Khanate.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70125947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-100-105
V. M. Alpatov
{"title":"Значение трудов С. А. Старостина для компаративистики","authors":"V. M. Alpatov","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-100-105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-100-105","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45356649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-60-75
Elena L. Rudnitskaya
In the paper, the Evenki negative existential construction with āčin is considered. The analysis is based on the use of this construction in the 21st century’s oral and written texts. The grammatical features of āčin are considered. In a finite clause, āčin agrees in number with the subject, and it cannot attach tense affixes. With these features as central for its 21st century use, we analyze āčin as a predicative adjective. Importantly, the āčin construction is not used in the noun modifier function in the 21st century Evenki. We propose that āčin is the head of a predicative adjective phrase (AdjPredP). The derivations of constructions with the nominative [NOM] and the partitive [PART] of missing object are compared. In the partitive object construction, the group [NP [PART] + āčin] is the predicate, and the subject is normally the possessor. The formal analysis of both cases is based on the assumption that [NP + āčin] is a small clause (SCi). This analysis accounts for the agreement patterns of āčin, and it includes the mechanisms of the nominative vs. partitive case assignment. In the adverbial use, there is a distinction between oral and written language. In the written language (that is close to the literary language), āčin has morphological properties of a noun (it can attach case and possessive affixes), and it is similar to the nominal head of a quasipossessive construction. In the oral language, the predicative adjective āčin construction [NP [PART] + āčin] is used primarily in the adverbial function. This and other oral speech innovations that create additional problems for the proposed formal analysis are discussed.
{"title":"Отрицательная экзистенциальная конструкция с āчин в эвенкийском языке: внутренняя синтаксическая структура","authors":"Elena L. Rudnitskaya","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-60-75","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-60-75","url":null,"abstract":"In the paper, the Evenki negative existential construction with āčin is considered. The analysis is based on the use of this construction in the 21st century’s oral and written texts. The grammatical features of āčin are considered. In a finite clause, āčin agrees in number with the subject, and it cannot attach tense affixes. With these features as central for its 21st century use, we analyze āčin as a predicative adjective. Importantly, the āčin construction is not used in the noun modifier function in the 21st century Evenki. We propose that āčin is the head of a predicative adjective phrase (AdjPredP). The derivations of constructions with the nominative [NOM] and the partitive [PART] of missing object are compared. In the partitive object construction, the group [NP [PART] + āčin] is the predicate, and the subject is normally the possessor. The formal analysis of both cases is based on the assumption that [NP + āčin] is a small clause (SCi). This analysis accounts for the agreement patterns of āčin, and it includes the mechanisms of the nominative vs. partitive case assignment. In the adverbial use, there is a distinction between oral and written language. In the written language (that is close to the literary language), āčin has morphological properties of a noun (it can attach case and possessive affixes), and it is similar to the nominal head of a quasipossessive construction. In the oral language, the predicative adjective āčin construction [NP [PART] + āčin] is used primarily in the adverbial function. This and other oral speech innovations that create additional problems for the proposed formal analysis are discussed.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45571361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-33-42
D. Zhornik
This article is aimed at investigating the passive voice as one of the means of marking information structure. The data we use come from our own fieldwork among the Upper Lozva Mansi in 2017—2019 conducted in villages of Ushma and Treskolje of the Ivdel district of the Sverdlovsk oblast, Russian Federation. The data gathered during field trips was assembled into a small corpus of the Northern Mansi language, and we extracted all examples of passive voice found in this corpus. In the article, we briefly summarize the views of our predecessors on the role of the passive voice in Ob-Ugric languages and afterwards we describe the general outline of information structure in Mansi by briefly depicting the use of subject and object conjugations, the passive voice and case marking. We separately analyze the passive voice constructions formed from intransitive, transitive and bitransitive verbs. We conclude that passive voice is, as stated in previous studies, used for promoting the most topical constituent to the subject position. However, we also suppose that there are some other factors that contribute to the choice of voice in Mansi, e. g. animacy and referential properties of the constituent in question. We describe cases in which the most animate or the most definite (and not the most topical) constituent is being promoted to the subject position. We also suppose that not only these factors may separately affect the choice of voice, but also that the sum of these parameters might be crucial. We suggest that it is necessary to create a formal model which would include all the above-mentioned parameters and adequately describe the choice of voice in Mansi and in Ob-Ugric.
{"title":"Пассивный залог как один из компонентов выражения информационной структуры в мансийском языке: данные верхнелозьвинского диалекта","authors":"D. Zhornik","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-33-42","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-33-42","url":null,"abstract":"This article is aimed at investigating the passive voice as one of the means of marking information structure. The data we use come from our own fieldwork among the Upper Lozva Mansi in 2017—2019 conducted in villages of Ushma and Treskolje of the Ivdel district of the Sverdlovsk oblast, Russian Federation. The data gathered during field trips was assembled into a small corpus of the Northern Mansi language, and we extracted all examples of passive voice found in this corpus. In the article, we briefly summarize the views of our predecessors on the role of the passive voice in Ob-Ugric languages and afterwards we describe the general outline of information structure in Mansi by briefly depicting the use of subject and object conjugations, the passive voice and case marking. We separately analyze the passive voice constructions formed from intransitive, transitive and bitransitive verbs. We conclude that passive voice is, as stated in previous studies, used for promoting the most topical constituent to the subject position. However, we also suppose that there are some other factors that contribute to the choice of voice in Mansi, e. g. animacy and referential properties of the constituent in question. We describe cases in which the most animate or the most definite (and not the most topical) constituent is being promoted to the subject position. We also suppose that not only these factors may separately affect the choice of voice, but also that the sum of these parameters might be crucial. We suggest that it is necessary to create a formal model which would include all the above-mentioned parameters and adequately describe the choice of voice in Mansi and in Ob-Ugric.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46655763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-90-99
Julia V. Normanskaja
This review analyzes the ways in which the Concise Cheremis-Russian Dictionary differs from the literary Mari language in order to answer the following question: was the dictionary compiled in the Pizhan subdialect of the Yaransk dialect of Northwestern Mari, which was spoken at that time in the Kukarskaya Sloboda, where the dictionary was created, or, as O. A. Sergeev claims, “words belonging to all the main dialects of the modern Mari language can be found in the Concise Cheremis-Russian Dictionary” [Сергеев 2020: 17]? To answer this question, a comprehensive graphic-phonetic analysis of the dictionary has been carried out. Three innovative features inherent in the Yaransk dialect have been identified (PMari *ć > ц, PMari *-j > 0, PMari *ńč́, *ńʒ́, *nǯ > нз) together with five more features that are characteristic of other first books: the preservation of the PMari *i, the reflection of PMari *ӧ as o and PMari *w as b, and the retention of vowel harmony. The only feature that occurs neither in the nineteenth-century books, nor in the modern dialects is the PMari *ӧ > е/э, which may indicate a later origin of Mari ӧ < Finno-Ugric *е than previously thought. Thus, the review shows that the dictionary could have been written in the Pizhan subdialect of the Yaransk dialect, which differed significantly from its modern state in the 18th century as it retained many archaic features characteristic of other first books. The analysis of the dictionary allows one to refine the history of the Yaransk dialect and the dating of certain sound changes.
{"title":"Первый черемисский словарь — архаический текст или конкорданс слов из нескольких марийских диалектов? (О. А. Сергеев. Василий Крекнин, Иоанн Платунов «Краткой черемиской словарь с российским переводом»: лингвистический анализ (с приложением словаря). Йошкар-Ола, 2020. 348 с.)","authors":"Julia V. Normanskaja","doi":"10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-90-99","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37892/2500-2902-2021-42-3-90-99","url":null,"abstract":"This review analyzes the ways in which the Concise Cheremis-Russian Dictionary differs from the literary Mari language in order to answer the following question: was the dictionary compiled in the Pizhan subdialect of the Yaransk dialect of Northwestern Mari, which was spoken at that time in the Kukarskaya Sloboda, where the dictionary was created, or, as O. A. Sergeev claims, “words belonging to all the main dialects of the modern Mari language can be found in the Concise Cheremis-Russian Dictionary” [Сергеев 2020: 17]? To answer this question, a comprehensive graphic-phonetic analysis of the dictionary has been carried out. Three innovative features inherent in the Yaransk dialect have been identified (PMari *ć > ц, PMari *-j > 0, PMari *ńč́, *ńʒ́, *nǯ > нз) together with five more features that are characteristic of other first books: the preservation of the PMari *i, the reflection of PMari *ӧ as o and PMari *w as b, and the retention of vowel harmony. The only feature that occurs neither in the nineteenth-century books, nor in the modern dialects is the PMari *ӧ > е/э, which may indicate a later origin of Mari ӧ < Finno-Ugric *е than previously thought. Thus, the review shows that the dictionary could have been written in the Pizhan subdialect of the Yaransk dialect, which differed significantly from its modern state in the 18th century as it retained many archaic features characteristic of other first books. The analysis of the dictionary allows one to refine the history of the Yaransk dialect and the dating of certain sound changes.","PeriodicalId":53462,"journal":{"name":"Ural-Altaic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41567045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：