Research and Scientific Conclusions about the Linguistic and Stylistic Features of the Work ‘Divan-i Hikmet’

S. Utebekov
{"title":"Research and Scientific Conclusions about the Linguistic and Stylistic Features of the Work ‘Divan-i Hikmet’","authors":"S. Utebekov","doi":"10.47526/2023-3/2664-0686.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, the author analyzes local and foreign publications of research and scientific data on the linguistic and stylistic features of the work of Divani-i Hikmet, which is considered one of the common heritages of the Turkic peoples. In particular, he analyzes the views of scientists such as A. Vamberi, A. Nazhip, T. Mentsel, E. Bertels, A.K. Borovkov, A.N. Kononov, N. Baskakov, F.M. Koprulu, E. Rustamov, G. Aidarov, A. Kurushzhanov, M. Tomanov, K. Eraslan, M. Orazov, G. Musaev, A. Guzel, R. Syzdykova, L. Kadyrov, A. Mukhtarov, U. Sanakulov, U. Tursunov, B. Urunboev, A. Aliyev about linguistic features of hikmets. Initially, having considered the divergence of opinions regarding which branch of the Turkic languages the “Divan-I Hikmet” belongs to, the author connects this connection with the large number of versions of the monument and the fact that the versions differ from each other in content and language. Further, he notes the fact that the version of “Divan-I Hikmet”, written under Khoja Ahmed Yassawi, did not reach our days, caused controversy among scientists. Meanwhile, the author believes that the allegations that Yasawi’s hikmets were written in the ancient Turkic language or in the Karakhanid period are unfounded, and the construction of one or another branch of the modern Turkic language is the result of forgetting some features of this language or language groups. In this regard, in order to prove or disagree with the views and conclusions of some scientists, expressing his opinion, basing himself on concrete examples, he compared some phonetic, morphological and lexical and grammatical features of Divani-i Hikmet with their use in ancient monuments and modern Turkic languages.","PeriodicalId":476423,"journal":{"name":"A. Âsaui atyndaġy Halyķaralyķ ķazaķ-tùrìk universitetìnìṇ habaršysy","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"A. Âsaui atyndaġy Halyķaralyķ ķazaķ-tùrìk universitetìnìṇ habaršysy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47526/2023-3/2664-0686.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, the author analyzes local and foreign publications of research and scientific data on the linguistic and stylistic features of the work of Divani-i Hikmet, which is considered one of the common heritages of the Turkic peoples. In particular, he analyzes the views of scientists such as A. Vamberi, A. Nazhip, T. Mentsel, E. Bertels, A.K. Borovkov, A.N. Kononov, N. Baskakov, F.M. Koprulu, E. Rustamov, G. Aidarov, A. Kurushzhanov, M. Tomanov, K. Eraslan, M. Orazov, G. Musaev, A. Guzel, R. Syzdykova, L. Kadyrov, A. Mukhtarov, U. Sanakulov, U. Tursunov, B. Urunboev, A. Aliyev about linguistic features of hikmets. Initially, having considered the divergence of opinions regarding which branch of the Turkic languages the “Divan-I Hikmet” belongs to, the author connects this connection with the large number of versions of the monument and the fact that the versions differ from each other in content and language. Further, he notes the fact that the version of “Divan-I Hikmet”, written under Khoja Ahmed Yassawi, did not reach our days, caused controversy among scientists. Meanwhile, the author believes that the allegations that Yasawi’s hikmets were written in the ancient Turkic language or in the Karakhanid period are unfounded, and the construction of one or another branch of the modern Turkic language is the result of forgetting some features of this language or language groups. In this regard, in order to prove or disagree with the views and conclusions of some scientists, expressing his opinion, basing himself on concrete examples, he compared some phonetic, morphological and lexical and grammatical features of Divani-i Hikmet with their use in ancient monuments and modern Turkic languages.
《希克梅特》的语言和文体特征研究及科学结论
在这篇文章中,作者分析了国内外关于Divani-i - Hikmet作品的语言和风格特征的研究和科学数据,该作品被认为是突厥民族的共同遗产之一。他特别分析了A. Vamberi、A. Nazhip、T. Mentsel、E. Bertels、A.K. Borovkov、A.N. Kononov、N. Baskakov、F.M. Koprulu、E. Rustamov、G. Aidarov、A. Kurushzhanov、M. Tomanov、K. Eraslan、M. Orazov、G. Musaev、A. Guzel、R. Syzdykova、L. Kadyrov、A. Mukhtarov、U. Sanakulov、U. Tursunov、B. Urunboev、A. Aliyev等科学家关于hikmets语言特征的观点。首先,考虑到关于“Divan-I Hikmet”属于哪个突厥语言分支的意见分歧,作者将这种联系与纪念碑的大量版本以及这些版本在内容和语言上彼此不同的事实联系起来。此外,他还指出,在Khoja Ahmed Yassawi的名义下撰写的“Divan-I Hikmet”版本没有流传到我们这个时代,这在科学家中引起了争议。同时,发件人认为,关于Yasawi的hikmets是用古突厥语或卡拉汗尼德时期的语言写成的指控是没有根据的,现代突厥语的一个或另一个分支的构建是忘记了该语言或语言群体的某些特征的结果。在这方面,为了证明或不同意某些科学家的观点和结论,他根据具体的例子表达了自己的观点,他将Divani-i - Hikmet的一些语音、形态学和词汇语法特征与它们在古代纪念碑和现代突厥语言中的使用进行了比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信