Purpose. Russian and foreign linguists studied the influence of Turkic languages on the grammatical and lexical composition of Mongolic languages. Material from monuments and modern living languages of Siberia shed light on the role of the early Turkic and Mongolic language in the development of the modern linguistic landscape of the region, specifying its place in the Altai linguistic family from a cultural perspective. Horse is a sacred animal for all Turkic and Mongolic speaking nomads that take an important place in their economy and culture, with all its characteristics being featured in the lexicon of the languages under comparison. Researchers also examined a wide range of Mongolian words reflecting various sex- and age-specific terms for livestock and its color as well as keeping and pasturing practices, pasture characteristics, livestock economy, etc. The lexicon characterizing horse movement in Turkic and Mongolic languages has not been the subject of comparative analysis in modern Turkic studies. Thus, the paper describes and analyzes the lexico-semantic group of words that represent the terms for the pattern of natural movement of horse in Turkic and Mongolic languages.Results. To achieve the research objectives we used the synchronous descriptive, comparative, contrastive-typological, and where possible comparative-historical methods. The study defined the structure and semantics of linguistic units, revealing considerably more similarities than differences in the plane of expression in both Turkic languages of Siberia and Mongolic layers of vocabulary.Conclusion. Yakut demonstrates both the Turkic and Mongolic layers, which is characteristic of all languages under comparison. Also, there are later borrowings from Buryat, e.g. the verbs denoting ‘amble’.
Analytical constructions are common in the Altai language. The verbal analytic constructions are very diverse, including adverbial participle, participle, and infinitive ones. This paper examines three-component “adverbial participial - participial” constructions: adverbial participle on =p; auxiliary verbs of being in the participle form on =Ar and =GAn; and auxiliary verb bol= (to be) in different grammatical forms. Four subtypes of multi-component constructions were studied. The analysis revealed the analytical construction to be the most frequent, with the first component being the free verb adverbial participle and the second component represented by the verbs of being tur= (to stand), otur= (to sit) and d’at= (to lie), d’ür= (to walk), fully grammaticalized and appearing as =GAn, and the third component, the verb bol=, used as a service predicate bolor (probably) expressing a high probability of the action. The semantics of an analytical construction proved to depend on its semantic components. Each grammatical element contributes its shade depending on: a) what verb is used as the first free component; b) what auxiliary verb is used as the second component and what is the temporal form of the verb; c) the grammatical form of the modal verb bol=. The analytical constructions studied demonstrate the following pattern: if the form with =DY of the final component bol= takes on the personal affixes, then the meaning of the action credibility in the past does not come first, the meaning of the admonitive becomes apparent, expressing a warning to the addressee about possible negative actions.
Целью исследования являлся анализ аффиксального способа словообразования якутского, алтайского языков на материале лексики частей тела животных. Для сопоставления и выявления общего и отличительного в аффиксальном словообразовании в анализируемых языках привлекался бурятский материал. Материалом анализа послужили данные словарей разной типологии и сравнительно-исторических исследований в целом по алтайским, а также по тюркским и монгольским языкам. Сопоставительный анализ выполнен на основе сравнительно-исторических исследований по тюркским языкам, опорой послужила «Сравнительно-историческая грамматика тюркских языков. Лексика» (2001). Использованы описательный, сравнительный, сравнительно-исторический методы исследования, метод сплошной выборки, а также приемы словообразовательного анализа и синтеза, систематизации, классификации. Проведенный аффиксальный способ словообразования дал возможность выявить общее и отличительное в словообразовательной системе тюркских и монгольских языков, относящихся к разным классификационным группам алтайской семьи языков, находящихся в контактной зоне сибирского ареала. Установлено, что аффиксальный способ словообразования в сравниваемых языках является продуктивным для пополнения лексикона частей тела животных, некоторые из якутских аффиксов являются заимствованиями из монгольских языков и представляют общее достояние якутского и бурятского языков. В результате изучения собранного материала авторы приходят к выводу о необходимости сравнительного исследования вторичных номинаций лексики частей тела животных в якутском, алтайском и бурятском языках: выявление древнейших продуктивных словообразовательных способов способствует установлению внутренних форм производных слов и выявлению первичных корневых морфем, что представляет собой первостепенную задачу сравнительно-исторического исследования якутского языка. Antonov N. K. Materialy po istoricheskoj leksike jakutskogo jazyka [Materials on the historical vocabulary of the Yakut language]. Jakutsk: Jakutskoe knizhnoe izdatel'stvo, 1971. 174 p. (in Russian). Almadakova N. D. Grammaticheskaja kategorija zaloga v altajskom jazyke [Grammatical category of the pledge in the Altai language]. Gorno-Altajsk, 2005. 118 p. (in Russian). Betlingk O. N. O jazyke jakutov [About the Yakut language] // Per. s nem. V. I. Rassadina. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1990. 644 p. (in Russian). Budazhanova L. B. K probleme slozhnosostavnyh slov v burjatskom jazyke (na materiale buddijskoj leksiki) [On the problem of compound words in the Buryat language (based on the material of Buddhist vocabulary)] // Vestnik Burjatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: Jazyk. Literatura. Kul'tura. 2018. Vyp. 2. P. 3–9. (in Russian). GSAJa – Grammatika sovremennogo altajskogo jazyka. Morfologija [Grammar of the modern Altai language. Morphology]. Gorno-Altajsk, 2017. 576 p. (in Russian). GBJa – Grammatika burjatskogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija [Grammar of the Buryat language. Phonetics and morphology]. M.: Izd-vo Vostochnoj literatury, 1962. 340 p. (in Russian). GSJaLJa – Grammatika sovremennogo jakutskogo literaturnogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija [Grammar of the modern Yakut literary language. Phonetics and morphology]. M.: Nauka, 1982. 496 p. (in Russian). Dondukov U.-Zh. Sh. Slovoobrazovanie mongol'skih jazykov [Word formation of the Mongolian languages]. Ulan-Udje, 1993. 230 p. (in Russian). Dybo A. V. Semanticheskaja rekonstrukcija v altajskoj jetimologii. Somaticheskie terminy (plechevoj sustav) [Semantic reconstruction in Altaic etymology. Somatic terms (shoulder joint)]. M., 1996. 386 p. Dyrheeva G. A., Haranutova D. Sh., Bardamova E. A. Parnye slova i parnoe slovoobrazovanie v burjatskom jazyke [Paired words and paired word formation in the Buryat language]. Ulan-Udje: Izd-vo Burjatskogo gosuniversiteta, 2014. 208 p. (in Russian). Ivanov S. A. Leksicheskie osobennosti govorov jakutskogo jazyka [Lexical features of the dialects of the Yakut language]. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2017. 392 p. (in Russian). Ivanov S. A. Obrazovanie dialektnoj sistemy jakutskogo jazyka [Formation of the dialect system of the Yakut language]. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2021. 256 p. (in Russian). Ivanova I. B. Affiksal'noe imennoe slovoobrazovanie v sovremennom jakutskom jazyke (na materiale otglagol'nyh imen sushhestvitel'nyh) [Affixal nominal word formation in the modern Yakut language (based on the material of verbal nouns)]. Avtoref…kand. diss. Jakutsk, 2011. 22 p. (in Russian). Kaluzhinskij Ct. Jetimologicheskie issledovanija po jakutskomu jazyku. Dvuslozhnye osnovy [Etymological research on the Yakut language. Two – syllable basics]. (II) // Rocznik orientalistyczny. 1978. T. XL. Z. 1. P. 71–82. (in Russian). Kolesnikova A. V. K harakteristike chastej tela cheloveka v tunguso-man'chzhurskih jazykah [On the characterization of human body parts in the Tungusic-Manchu languages] // Ocherki sravnitel'noj leksikologii altajskih jazykov. – Leningrad: Nauka, 1972. P. 257–336. (in Russian). Kolesnikova A. V. Affiksal'noe glagoloobrazovanie v altajskom jazyke v sopostavlenii s drevnetjurkskim jazykom [Affixal verb formation in the Altai language in comparison with the ancient Turkic language]. Avtoref… na soiskanie diss. dokt. filol. n. Novosibirsk, 2004. (in Russian). Musaev K. M. Leksikologija tjurkskih jazykov [Lexicology of the Turkic languages]. M.: Nauka, 1984. 226 p. (in Russian). Okoneshnikov E. I. Lingvisticheskie aspekty terminologii jakutskogo jazyka [Linguistic aspects of the terminology of the Yakut language]. Avtoref. dokt…diss. Jakutsk, 2005. 52 p. (in Russian) Orlovskaja M. N. Imena sushhestvitel'nye i prilagatel'nye v sovremennom mongol'skom jazyke [Nouns and adjectives in modern Mongolian]. M.: Izd-vo Vostochnoj literatury, 1961. 114 p. (in Russian). Rassadin V. I. Ocherki po morfologii i slovoobrazovaniju mongol'skih jazykov [Essays on the morphology and word formation of the Mongolian languages]. Jelista, 2008. 232 p. (in Russian). SIGTJa 1988 – Sravnitel'no-istoricheskaja grammatika tjurkskih jazykov: Morfologija [Comparative historical Grammar of the Turkic languages: Morphology]. M.: «Nauka», 1988. 560 p. (in Russian). SIGTJa 2001 – Sravnitel'no-istoricheskaja grammatika tjurkskih jazykov: Leksika [Comparative historical Grammar of the Turkic languages: Vocabulary]. M.: «Nauka», 2001. 822 p. (in Russian). Tarakanova I. M. Slovoobrazovanie imen sushhestvitel'nyh v hakasskom jazyke (v sopostavitel'nom aspekte) [Word formation of nouns in the Khakass language (in a comparative aspect)]. Abakan: Hakasskoe knizh. izd-vo, 2008. 174 p. (in Russian). Tybykova A. T. Orfografija i punktuacija altajskogo jazyka [Spelling and punctuation of the Altai language]. Gorno-Altajsk, 1981. (in Russian). Haranutova D. Sh. Burjatskoe slovoobrazovanie: strukturno-semanticheskaja organizacija [Buryat word formation: structural and semantic organization]. Ulan-Udje: Izd-vo Burjatskogo gosuniversiteta, 2012. 269 p. (in Russian). Chajchina E. V. Leksiko-semanticheskoe vzaimootnoshenie komponentov parnyh slov v altajskom jazyke [Lexicosemantic relationship of the components of paired words in the Altai language] // Jazyki korennyh narodov Sibiri. Novosibirsk, 2004. Pp. 115–120. (in Russian). Shagdarov L. D., Shagdarova D. L. Slozhnoe slovo v burjatskom jazyke [A complex word in the Buryat language]. Ulan-Udje: Izd-vo Burjatskogo gosuniversiteta, 2015. 265 p. (in Russian). Shherbak A. M. O haraktere leksicheskih vzaimosvjazej tjurkskih, mongol'skih i tunguso-man'chzhurskih jazykov [On the nature of lexical interrelations of the Turkic, Mongolian and Tungusic-Manchu languages] // Voprosy jazykoznanija, 1966, № 3. (in Russian). Shherbak A. M. Ocherki po sravnitel'noj morfologii tjurkskih jazykov (Imja) [Essays on the comparative morphology of the Turkic languages (Name)]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1977. 182 p. (in Russian). Cincius V. I. Zadachi sravnitel'noj leksikologii altajskih jazykov [Tasks of comparative lexicology of the Altai languages] // Ocherki sravnitel'noj leksikologii altajskih jazykov. Leningrad: Nauka, 1972. Pp. 3–14. (in Russian). Kaluzinsky St. Mongolische Elemente in der Jakutischen Sprache. Warszawa, 1961. www.buryat-lang.ru – Russko-burjatskij slovar'.
In the following article, we analyze the polyfunctional form with =ZA in the Altai language. Traditionally, this form is viewed as a marker of conditional mood. Our materials show that its semantics and functions are very varied. It can be used not only in infinite functions within polypredicative constructions, but also as an independent finite form with the meaning of a non-real, contrafactive volition. When it is used as a dependent predicate, this form mainly denotes modality of an action’s conditions according to the speaker’s point of view. When one uses the if conjunction, the expected action-condition may not take place, and when the when conjunction is used, such possibility is not considered, but rather, temporal relations are expressed (consecution, simultaneity, general temporal correlation). Specific temporal meanings depend on specific tense forms of finite predicates: if the predicate of a main clause is in present tense, the construction denotes general temporal correlation; if a future tense form is used, it denotes consecution or simultaneity in the future; the past tense denotes consecution in the past. With a 2nd person singular and plural affix =ZAŋ, =ZAgAr expresses the meaning of soft incentive. The =ZA form as a marker of concessive mood denotes completion of an action in spite of conflicting conditions, which demonstrates the shift of this form towards other mood forms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.