Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungus-Manchu Vocabularies: Etymological Research Methods and Objectives in the General Context of Contemporary Comparative-Historical Linguistics
https://doi.org/10.22162/2619-0990-2020-47-1-183-197
Abstract
Introduction. The article discusses contemporary comparative-historical Altaic studies and problems of interpreting genetic and areal relations between Altaiс languages in educational discourse. Goals. The paper seeks to show that available Altaic linguistic constructs are largely determined by inertial outdated ideas about supposed affinities between independent groups of languages, and that many research paradigms in contemporary Turkology and Mongolian studies still remain somewhat biased and, thus, aimed at previously known negative results. At the same time, those are achievements in general Altaic reconstructions that yield a most reliable apparatus to separate general Altaic lexemes and original protoforms — from multidirectional borrowings, the presence of which was never denied by Altaists. So, the study theoretically analyzes ideas about the nature of relations between Altaiс languages through the lens of experience accumulated by Indo-European linguistics focusing on a group of languages with undeniable genetic ties. Materials and Methods. The work newly compares some Mongolic, Tungus-Manchu, and Turkic words, which reveals new phonetic correspondences hidden by historical changes in phonetic word structures of Turkic and partly Tungus-Manchu languages. Results. The paper substantiates a genetic kinship of Altaiс languages, and eliminates the reconstruction drawbacks identified by Acad. B. A. Serebrennikov. Conclusions. When it comes to etymological research of Altaic vocabularies, experience of Indo-European linguistics represented in textbooks and etymological dictionaries may prove instrumental enough.
Supporting agencies: The reported study was funded by government subsidy ― project name ‘Oral and Written Heritage of Mongolic Peoples of Russia, Mongolia and China: Cross-Border Traditions and Interactions’ (state reg. no. АААА-А19-119011490036-1).
About the Author
Alexey A. Burykin
Kalmyk Scientific Center of the RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sc. (Philology), Dr. Sc. (History), Leading Research Associate
8, Ilishkin St., Elista 358000, Russian Federation
References
1. [Comparative Dictionary of Tungus-Manchu Languages]. Vol. I. V. Tsintsius (ed.). Leningrad: Nauka, 1975. 672 p. (In Tungus-Manchu and Russ.)
2. [Comparative Dictionary of Tungus-Manchu Languages]. Vol. II. V. Tsintsius (ed.). Leningrad: Nauka, 1977. 992 p. (In Tungus-Manchu and Russ.)
3. [Dictionary of Old Turkic]. 2nd ed. Astana: Gylym Baspasy, 2016. 760 p. (In Turk.)
4. [Etymological Studies: Theory and Practice]. Moscow: Nauka, 1985.104 p. (In Russ.)
5. Akhmetyanov R. G. [Tatar Etymological Dictionary]. In 2 vols. Kazan: Magarif–Vakyt, 2015. Vol. 1: A–Л, 543 p.; vol. II: M–Я, 567 p. (In Tat.)
6. Alpatov V. M. One more time about the Altaic issue. In: [Collected Turkic Studies, 2009–2010: Eurasian Turks in Ancient Times and the Middle Ages]. Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura, 2011. Pp. 25–32. (In Russ.)
7. Androsova M. A. [Comparative Historical Linguistics: Recommended Practices for University Students]. Ulyanovsk: Ulyanovsk State University of Technology, 2009. 87 p. (In Russ.)
8. Anikin A. E. [Russian Etymological Dictionary]. Moscow: Vinogradov Russian Language Institute (RAS), 2007. 67 p. (In Russ.)
9. Babushkina T. V. [Etymology: an Internet Manual for Primary School and Pre-Service Teachers]. Tver: Tver State University, 2001. 104 p. (In Russ.)
10. Bagana Zh., Khapilina E. [Contact Linguistics: Language Interaction and Bilingualism]. Monograph. Moscow: Flinta; Nauka, 2010. 128 p. (In Russ.)
11. Buck C. D. A Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal Indo-European Languages. University of Chicago, 1949. 1515 p. (In Eng.)
12. Burlak S. A., Starostin S. A. [Comparative Historical Linguistics]. Moscow: Academia, 2005. 432 p. (In Russ.)
13. Burykin A. A. About the amount and nature of Turkic-Mongolian and Turkic-Tungusic lexical relations in a new perspective: the role of the theory of genetic relationship of the Altaic languages in the identification of ancient language contacts. Bulletin of the Kalmyk Institute for Humanities of the RAS (Oriental Studies). 2017. No. 5. Pp. 190–198. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.22162/2075-7794-2017-33-5-190-198
14. Burykin A. A. Etymological analysis: some principal issues revisited. In: [Referencing in Language and Literature]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University, 1987. Pp. 235–237. (In Russ.)
15. Burykin A. A. Lexical borrowings: identification criteria in lexicology, general comparative linguistics, and Altaic studies revisited. In: [Mongolic Languages: Past and Present]. Conf. proc. (St. Petersburg; October 21–23, 2013). St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2013. Pp. 35–40. (In Russ.)
16. Burykin A. A. Turko-Mongolic issues and etymological dictionaries. In: [Turko-Mongols: Issues of Ethnic History and Culture]. Coll. papers. Vol. 4. Elista: Kalmyk Scientific Center of RAS, 2016. Pp. 152–167. (In Russ.)
17. Burykin A. A., Nasilov D. M. B. A. Serebrennikov as Turkologist–comparativist and problems of Altaic studies. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. 2018. No. 3. Pp. 5–17. (In Russ.)
18. Butylov N. V. [Turkic Loanwords in Mordvinic Languages]. Cand. Sc. (philology) thesis. Saransk, 1998. 190 p. (In Russ.)
19. Clauson G. An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. 988 p. (In Turk.)
20. Doerfer G. Can the question of Altaic linguistic affinity be solved from the standpoint of Indo-European studies? Voprosy Jazykoznanija. 1972. No. 3. Pp. 50–66. (In Russ.)
21. Dybo A. V. [Altaic Etymology: Semantic Reconstruction]. Moscow: Institute of Linguistics (RAS), 1996. 385 p. (In Russ.)
22. Egorov V. G. [Chuvash Etymological Dictionary]. Cheboksary: Chuvash Book Publ., 1964. 356 p. (In Chuv.)
23. Eren H. [Turkish Etymological Dictionary]. Ankara: Bizim Büro Basım Evi, 1999. 512 p. (In Turk.)
24. Fedotov M. R. [Chuvash-Mari Language Ties]. Monograph. Saransk: Saransk Branch of Saratov State University, 1990. 334 p. (In Russ.)
25. Fedotov M. R. [Chuvash Etymological Dictionary]. Cheboksary: Chuvash State Institute for Humanities Research, 1996. Vol. 1, 470 p.; vol. 2, 509 p. (In Chuv.)
26. Galinova N. V. [Russian Etymology]. Yekaterinburg: Ural Federal University, 2015. 110 p. (In Russ.)
27. Gertsenberg L. G. [Brief Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics]. St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2010. 316 p. (In Russ.)
28. Gertsenberg L. G. Altaic languages: studies in their genetic affinities revisited. Voprosy Jazykoznanija. 1974. No. 2. Pp. 47–55. (In Russ.)
29. Gertsenberg L. G. Altaic studies in the eyes of a Indo-Europeanist. In: [Issue of Altaic Linguistic Affinities]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1971. Pp. 31–46. (In Russ.)
30. Girfanova A. Kh. Prof. Leonard Hertzenberg and the Altaic linguistics. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. 2014. Vol. X. No. 1. Pp. 559–564. (In Russ.)
31. Girfanova, A. Kh., Sukhachev N. L. Etymological Dictionary of Altaic Languages: linguistic essentials of Altaic studies revisited. In: [Asia-Pacific: Archaeology, Ethnography, History]. Coll. papers. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 2014. Vol. 3. Pp. 183–196. (In Russ.)
32. Hasan Bek Hadi. [Turkish Etymological Dictionary]. Tabriz, 2010. 16599 p. (In Turk.)
33. Ishkildina L. K. [Historical Development of Bashkir Consonantism: a Case Study of Bashkir Dialects]. Cand. Sc. (philology) thesis. Kazan, 2013. 264 p. (In Russ.)
34. Kazansky N. N. Commemorating Prof. Leonard G. Gertsenberg. In: Acta Linguistica Petropolitana, COLLOQUIA CLASSICA ET INDOGERMANICA VI. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2014. Pp. 7–16. (In Russ.)
35. Khelimsky E. A. [Comparative Research and Uralic Studies: Lectures and Articles]. Moscow: Yazyki Russkoi Kultury, 2000. 640 p. (In Russ.)
36. Krasukhin K. G. [Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics]. Moscow: Academia, 2004. 320 p. (In Russ.)
37. Kuribayashi Hitoshi (comp.) Comparative basic vocabularies for Mongolian (Chakhar), Dagur, Shera-Yugur, Monguor, Bao-an and Dongshiang. Studies of Linguistic and Cultural Contacts. 1989. No.1. Pp. 153–383. (In Eng.)
38. Kuzmina A. A. [Types of Word Stems in Yakut Nouns: Formation of Mono- and Disyllabic Stems]. Cand. Sc. (philology) thesis. Yakutsk, 2017. 286 p. (In Russ.)
39. Kyzlasov I. L. [Altaic Studies and Archaeology]. Moscow: Institute of Turkic Studies, 2011. 256 p. (In Russ.)
40. Mukimova N. A. [Finno-Ugric Loanwords in the Bashkir Language]. Cand. Sc. (philology) thesis abstract. Ufa, 2014. 23 p. (In Russ.)
41. Muzraeva D. N., Burykin A. A. To the issues of studying Oirat and Kalmyk lexicon. Bulletin of the Kalmyk Institute for Humanities of the RAS (Oriental Studies). 2015. № 2. S. 118–123. (In Russ.)
42. Nadzhip E. N. [Comparative Historical Dictionary of 14th-Century Turkic Languages: a Case Study of Qutb’s Khosrow and Shirin]. Vol. I. Moscow: GRVL, 1979. 479 p. (In Russ.)
43. Nasipov I. C. [Finno-Ugric Loanwords in the Tatar Language: Synopsis and Taxonomy]. Dr. Sc. (philology) thesis. Kazan, 2010. 452 p. (In Russ.)
44. Novgorodov I. N. Verbs of the sustainable vocabulary and list of M. Swadesh in the Turkic and Mongolian languages. Modern Science: Actual Problems of Theory and Practice. Series HUMANITIES. 2019. No. 09/2. Pp. 163–169. (In Russ.)
45. Rajki A. [Mongolian Etymological Dictionary]. 2006. 87 p. (In Mong.)
46. Ramstedt G. J. [Dictionary of Kalmyk]. Helsinki: Finno-Ugric Society, 1935. 560 p. (In Kalm. and Germ.)
47. Räsänen M. [An Etymological Dictionary of Turkic Languages]. Helsinki: Finno-Ugric Society, 1969. 533 p. (In Turk. and Germ.)
48. Rassadin V. I. [Altaic Studies]. Coursebook. Elista: Kalmyk State University, 2014. 44 p. (In Russ.)
49. Rassadin V. I. Etymologization of Buryat words revisited. Buryat State University Bulletin. Ser. Philology. 2006. No. 11. Pp. 3–14. (In Russ.)
50. Rassadin V. I. Etymologization of Mongolian words: some issues revisited. In: [Seventh International Congress of Mongolists]. (Ulaanbaatar; August 1997). Reports of Russian scientists. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS), 1997. Pp. 151–153. (In Russ.)
51. Rassadin V. I. Etymologization of Mongolic words revisited. In: [Mongolian Studies]. Vol. 4. Elista: Kalmyk Humanities Research Institute of RAS, 2007. Pp. 27–40. (In Russ.)
52. Sanzheev G. D., Orlovskaya M. N., Shevernina Z. V. [Etymological Dictionary of Mongolic Languages]. In 3 vols. Vol. I: A–E. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS), 2015. 224 p. (In Mong. and Russ.)
53. Sanzheev G. D., Orlovskaya M. N., Shevernina Z. V. [Etymological Dictionary of Mongolic Languages]. In 3 vols. Vol. II: G–P. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS), 2016. 232 p. (In Mong. and Russ.)
54. Sanzheev G. D., Orlovskaya M. N., Shevernina Z. V. [Etymological Dictionary of Mongolic Languages]. In 3 vols. Vol. III. Q–Z. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS), 2018. 240 p. (In Mong. and Russ.)
55. Sevortyan E. V. [Etymological Dictionary of Turkic Languages]. (comp.).Vols. 1–7. Moscow: Nauka, 1974–2003. (In Turk. and Russ.)
56. Shaykhulov A. G. [Structure and Ideographic Paradigmatics of Monosyllabic Word Stems in Kipchak Languages of the Ural-Volga Region in the Continuum of Areal, Inter- and Common Turkic Vocabulary: Synopsis and Taxonomy of the Cognitive Sphere ‘Nature’]. Dr. Sc. (philology) thesis. Moscow, 2001. 485 p. (In Russ.)
57. Shcherbak A. M. Remote genetic ties between Turkic languages revisited. In: [Topical Issues of Comparative Linguistics]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1989. Pp. 150–161. (In Russ.)
58. Shelepova L. I. [Russian Etymology: Theory and Practice]. Coursebook. Barnaul: Altai State University, 2005. 160 p. (In Russ.)
59. Starostin S. A. [Altaic Problem and Origins of the Japanese Language]. Moscow: GRVL, 1991. 190 p. (In Russ.)
60. Starostin S. A. [Linguistic Works]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kultur, 2007. 924 p. (In Russ.)
61. Starostin S. A., Dybo A. V., Mudrak O. A. An Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. Vol. 1–3. Leiden; Boston, Brill, 2003. 2096 p.
62. Tarakanov I. V. [Udmurt-Turkic Language Contacts]. Dr. Sc. (philology) thesis. Ustinov, 1985. 542 p. (In Russ.)
63. Tarakanov I. V. Thesis Review: Finno-Ugric Loanwords in the Tatar Language: Synopsis and Taxonomy by I. S. Nasipov. In: [Yearbook of Finno-Ugric Studies]. Vol. 4. Izhevsk: Udmurt State University, 2010. Pp. 130–134. (In Russ.)
64. Tatarintsev B. I. [Tuvan Etymological Dictionary]. D. A. Mongush (ed.). Humanities Research Institute of the Tyva Republic. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2009. Vols. 1–4. 345, 388, 440, 442 p. (In Tuv.)
65. Vvedenskaya L. A., Kolesnikov N. P. [Etymology]. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2004. 221 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Burykin A.A. Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungus-Manchu Vocabularies: Etymological Research Methods and Objectives in the General Context of Contemporary Comparative-Historical Linguistics. Oriental Studies. 2020;13(1):183-197. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22162/2619-0990-2020-47-1-183-197
Views:
588
Email this article 