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

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.