On April 24-25, 2008, the Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow) hosted the 2008 Tenishev Readings. This is the fourth conference dedicated to the memory of the outstanding Russian Turkologist E. R. Tenishev (1921-2004).

In the four years that have passed since the scientist's death, through the efforts of colleagues and students of Ed-khyam Rakhimovich, the management of the Institute of Reading has turned into an annual All-Russian academic conference. Scientists - Orientalists, Turkologists, Mongolists, Altaists - from different regions of Russia and countries of the near and far abroad consider it important and honorable to participate in its work.

The first Tenishev readings were held in 2005, the second in 2006. A significant result of the third readings (2007) was the collection "Aspects of Altaism" published based on their materials (Moscow, 2007).

The conference was attended by reports of colleagues and friends of E. R. Tenishev, his students and students of his students. Topics include various fields of Turkic and more broadly Altaic linguistics, the history and structure of Altaic-type languages, their external genetic connections and contacts. The name of Edkham Rakhimovich continues to serve the cause of continuity and development of Russian altaism.

Opening the conference, the oldest employee of the Turkic Languages sector of the Institute of Linguistics, K. M. Musayev, spoke about his life and joint work with his colleague E. R. Tenishev-a person, scientist, organizer.

K. M. Musayev continued his speech with the report "On the Middle Kypchak literary language". For many medieval monuments of Turkic languages, he noted, a single research plan has not yet been developed that could cover all known monuments. There is no consensus about the historical relationship of these monuments to each other, nor about their place in the system of ancient and modern Turkic languages.

In the Middle Ages, there was a single Kipchak literary language, which had minor dialect differences in vast territories of Eurasia. Its monuments have come down to us in the form of numerous dictionaries and texts of various genres and testify to the important role of the Kipchaks in the Middle Ages. This literary language, which has absorbed the rich language of oral folk art of the Kipchak tribes, goes back to the ancient Turkic literary language. Both the literary language and the ancient Turkic "runic" script had territorial variations with some differences.

The Middle Kipchak literary language later participated in the formation of modern Kipchak and Oguz national literary languages.

In the report of F. Sh. Nurieva (Kazan State University) "Norm and variability in the language of Turkic-language monuments of the Middle Ages", the results of studying the initial stage of the formation of the Tatar literary language, which is a derivative of the Volga-Turkic literary language, were presented. Based on a detailed survey of a large number of monuments

page 114
It is shown that the literary language in the Golden Horde was formed on the basis of Kipchak koine, which absorbed regional linguistic features in the works of writers and poets based on the centuries-old common Turkic literary tradition. The paper uses a new method for Tatar linguistics of continuous lexical and morphological analysis of all attracted monuments and statistical processing of the material. The results obtained are interpreted through the prism of dividing facts into "basic" and "peripheral" ones, correlated with the concepts of norms and variability.

G. F. Blagova (Institute of Linguistics) outlined the principles of compiling a scientific biography of Academician A. N. Samoilovich in the aspect of modern historiography of Turkic languages.

The historiography of Turkology as a part of scientific studies is currently called upon to radically expand the research material, primarily by appealing to archival funds. From this point of view, the first scientific biography of A. N. Samoilovich, compiled and published by F. D. Ashnin 45 years ago (J. "Peoples of Asia and Africa". 1963. N 2), requires additions, clarifications, and improvements. In the archive collections of A. N. Samoilovich and his colleagues, a special place is occupied by the epistolary heritage, and first of all-correspondence with V. V. Barthold, which lasted almost a quarter of a century (87 letters). A. N. Samoilovich considered scientific correspondence to be a separate "side of scientific activity". The letters contain documented information about the current state of Turkology, directions of its development, and scientific ideas.

G. F. Blagova proposed a set of methodological techniques for the most effective use of archival materials.

F. G. Khisamitdinova (Institute of History, Language and Literature, Ufa) spoke about three periods of development of linguistics in Bashkiria: pre-Soviet (late XVIII - first quarter of XX century), Soviet (20s-80s of XX century) and post-Soviet.

The Bashkir language was introduced to the scientific use of Turkologists in the 1920s and 1930s due to the intensive expedition work of the founder of Bashkir linguistics N. K. Dmitriev and his colleagues. During the Soviet period, Bashkir linguists solved problems related to the development of an updated literary language, alphabet, bilingual and explanatory dictionaries, and the creation of new grammars and textbooks. In the post-Soviet period, traditional studies of Bashkir linguistics were continued, a new academic grammar of the Bashkir language was created, as well as new explanatory, Russian-Bashkir, and Bashkir-Russian dictionaries. In recent years, ethnolinguistic and sociolinguistic studies have begun to develop.

F. G. Khisamitdinova considers the creation of a corpus of colloquial speech and a corpus of written texts of the XX century, as well as the creation of electronic resources in the Bashkir language, to be the tasks facing Bashkir linguistics in the near future.

K. N. Bicheldey (MSPU) noted the role of the Tenishev readings in consolidating the Turkological scientific community, in ensuring the continuity of scientific directions that E. R. Tenishev led for many decades. K. N. Bicheldey highlighted the problem of rhythmic and melodic research of incentive sentences of the Khakass language. Creating the most informative research program requires a systematic approach to the study and inventory of all the features of motivation common to the Khakass literary language and specific to the dialect system at the structural, semantic and functional levels.

T. N. Borgoyakova (N. F. Katanov Khakass State University, Abakan) spoke about the functions and semantics of auxiliary verbs in the Khakass language. About 20 auxiliary verbs in most cases function as service components that express the mode of action, combined with the semantic gerund in the preposition. Each of these constructs can serve the following functions:: 1) serve as a basis for the formation of complex verbs; 2) express various modes of action; 3) express specific meaning; 4) form complex vide-temporal and modal-temporal formants.

The report of L. L. Glashev (Institute of Archaeology of the Caucasus, Nalchik) was devoted to the problem of reconstruction of the Turkic languages of the Khazar Khaganate. The speaker suggests distinguishing between three languages: the language of the Volga Bulgars, the language of the Huns of the North Caucasus, and the language of the minority-the top of the ruling house of the Khazar Khaganate. Written sources, both Byzantine and Eastern, agree that the Khazar khagans originated in Central Asia. The preserved Khazar words (titles, names, etc.) have an analogy in the titulature of the Central Asian Turks (kagan, shad, jabgu, khatun, Tarkhan). Khazar language, which was close to the language of the Turks of the Western Caucasus.

page 115
By the tenth century it was finally absorbed by other Turkic languages of Eastern Europe.

I. G. Dobrodomov's report "Turkisms in the soul letters of Moscow princes" analyzes the Turkic lexical elements found in the soul letters (wills) of Moscow princes of the XIV century, which are a mystery to historians-medievalists and linguists, who give them approximate and even incorrect interpretations presented in Russian historical lexicography. Based on etymological considerations, the meaning of the Turkisms katporga (bag, bag, pocket), tuzluk (salt shaker) is established. The word kalita (pocket) found in the same place, contrary to popular opinion, cannot be considered Turkism due to the violation of vowel harmony in it.

P. P. Dambueva (Institute of Linguistics) in the report "Expression of reflexive meaning in the modern Buryat language" considered a number of means of expressing reflexive semantics: affixes, special lexical elements, the participation of the lexical meaning of a verb, as well as its environment in expressing the direction of action on the subject. P. P. Dambueva believes that the reflexive voice is used in any language. However, reflexive constructions are not less common than other voice forms and meanings, and therefore the lack of detailed information about reflexive constructions in Mongolian languages represents a significant gap in their grammatical description.

A. V. Esipova (Kuzbass State Pedagogical University). akad., Novokuznetsk) presented the report "Elements of syntax in word formation" on adjectives in-lyg (- ly) in Turkic languages. The report establishes the presence of word-forming relations between the na-lyg derivative and its producer; identifies the features that distinguish the na-lyg derivatives from word forms; shows the properties of the affix-lyg characteristic of derivatives; considers the factors that make it difficult to recognize these affixes as word-forming proper.

The material of the study on the Shor language is an electronic corpus of Shor texts; information on other Turkic languages is borrowed from the scientific literature. Based on the data of the Shor, Tatar, Turkish languages and materials of the Turkic languages of Siberia, it is established that the peculiarity of the derived na-lyg does not destroy the properties of adjectives and does not exclude them from the system of adjectives of the Turkic languages. The report shows that this affix refers to the actual word-forming polysemous affixes with a hierarchically organized system of meanings that has developed as a result of strong and weak word formation. The study confirms the opinion of Turkologists who believe that na-lyg adjectives constitute a special group of adjectives characteristic of the Turkic languages.

The report of I. L. Kyzlasov (Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences)" The appearance of the Yenisei epitaphs: ideas about eternity " is devoted to the monuments of the Yenisei runic script, the features of its material carriers and their external appearance. The creators of the Yenisei epitaphs used only ancient stones of previous eras, which had been standing in the steppe for many centuries before: Eneolithic and Bronze Age sculptures, menhirs of the Early Iron Age. This is indicated by the shape of the stones, the desert tan of the surfaces and the petroglyphs preserved on them. Consequently, according to the ideas of the early Middle Ages, eternal stones (bengyu tash) were only those that had stood in the steppe since time immemorial. The presentation was accompanied by illustrations and slides that aroused great interest of the audience.

L. Latfullina (Moscow State Pedagogical University) reproduced the speech of E. R. Tenishev in April 2001 at the Institute of Linguistics at a meeting dedicated to his 80th anniversary and 50th anniversary of his scientific activity. These were his memories of his childhood, youth, environment, life choice, philosophy of science and the purpose of a scientist.

O. A. Mudrak (Institute of Linguistics) in his report "Mongolisms in the poetry of Makhmud Kashgarsky" proposed a new reading of the poems given by Makhmud Kashgarsky. Based on the updated analysis of the texts, some new translations are proposed. From a linguistic point of view, the large number of borrowings from Middle Mongolian in the language of these poems is interesting, which indicates significant domestic and military contacts with the Mongols.

D. M. Nasilov (ISAA at Moscow State University) made a report on the na-duk form in Makhmud Kashgarsky's Divan. For the historical grammar of the Turkic languages, the comments of Mahmud of Kashgar on the use of the affix-duk/-dyak are of great interest; its temporal meaning is often defined by Turkologists as"past participle". Interesting svya-

page 116
zi of this participle with other verb forms. In particular, the negative form-maduk both in monuments and in modern languages acts as a functional equivalent for the participle in-mish: -maduk = -mamish. Some Turkologists associate-duk with the past tense form na-dy, see it as a proto-form for the preterite na-dy. As evidence, these scholars cite Mahmud's reference to the fact that in some dialects-duk appears as a finite form (ol ya qur-duk = ol ya qur-dy-MK II).

The report provides evidence for the assumption that in this case, Mahmud, following the Arabic tradition, derived the non-existent function of this form by analogy; perhaps he started from the predicative use of the form-maduk. Therefore, references to examples from the "Sofa", apparently, do not have evidentiary value.

Yu. V. Normanskaya (Institute of Linguistics) in her report "Reconstruction of the Proto-Turkic system of meteorological names and its development in modern Turkic languages" considered the following issues: 1) is the ambiguity in the names of meteorological phenomena in modern Turkic languages an archaism or an innovation? 2) is this ambiguity related to the geographical localization of native speakers of this language?

Referring each specific example of polysemy to archaisms or innovations, Yu. V. Normanskaya made decisions using a specially developed algorithm. It made the following conclusions.

Polysemy, which is an innovation, is associated with the geographical localization of languages: the syncretic description of 'cold' is presented mainly in the southern languages (Turkish, Azerbaijani, Uzbek, Turkmen, Kumyk, Karakalpak). However, the preservation of polysemy, which is an archaism, has nothing to do with the geographical distribution of languages, for example: 'heat, heat' - in Yakut, Turkish, Azerbaijani, Khalaj, Kumyk; 'frost, frost' - in Chuvash, Yakut, Tuvan, Khakass; Turkish, Azerbaijani, Turkmen, Kumyk, Tatar, Nogai, Karakalpak; Kyrgyz; Uzbek, Uyghur.

In the report of A. V. Dybo (Institute of Linguistics) "Borrowings from the ancient languages of Xinjiang in the language of Mahmud Kashgar", it was noted that these are isolated borrowings from Early Mandarin Chinese, from Sogdian (possibly a local dialect), from the medieval languages of Xinjiang-Khotan - Saki and Tokhar-In and isolated from Middle Mongolian. The thematic areas are political life, trade and economy. The mutual orientation of borrowings in the cases of Saka and Tocharian indicates a close ethnic interaction.

The report of R. A. Tadinova (Institute of Linguistics) presents a brief history of Chechen-Turkic language contacts. The nature of changes in borrowed Turkic elements of different language levels in the structure of the Chechen language is established. So, on the example of the implementation of the Turkic back-language consonants k, g in words that have passed into the Chechen language, a specific source of borrowing is established; the morphological adaptation of Turkic names is analyzed from the point of view of their word formation; the set of reasons for various changes in the structure of the Turkic word during its transition to the Chechen language is considered.

З. N. Ekba (Institute of Linguistics) highlighted the issue of loanwords of Arabic and Persian origin, which have received new meanings in modern Turkic languages. For modern Turkic languages, there is a traditional classification of semantic changes in words of Arabic and Persian origin, according to which the so-called words that have received new meanings are distinguished into a separate group. However, a deeper etymological analysis and detailed consideration of these borrowings in several groups of languages at the same time almost always reveals if not direct, then indirect connection of these new meanings with the meaning in the source language (the report provides a number of examples).

Consequently, the presence of some common semantic components in the meanings of words in Arabic and Persian, Proto-Turkic and its reflexes in modern Turkic languages gives reason to consider this group of words not as "having received new meanings", but rather as "having expanded the range of meanings as a result of borrowing". A more detailed study of this kind of borrowed words applied to several groups of languages simultaneously provides an opportunity not only to restore the supposed lost meanings of polysemous words in the source language, but also to recreate a series of lexical units that have fallen out of use in some languages, but have been preserved as borrowings in others.

page 117
G. Wood (Gorno-Altaisk) in her report "The concept of God and his names among the Altaians" considered the issue of translating the Bible into Altaian and other Turkic languages in the light of the ambiguous interpretation of the words used in these languages when naming God (master, master).

K. Y. Reshetnikov (Institute of Linguistics) in his report "Some amendments to the Uralic reconstruction" considered the reflexion of the Uralic *a first syllable in the Samoyed language, demonstrating a number of additional distributions that, in all likelihood, eliminate the need for reconstruction for the Proto-Uralic additional phoneme s, introduced into the Proto-Uralic vocalism by M. Sammalakhti and Yu. By Yanghunen.

In conclusion, it was noted that the readings were very fruitful. Their participants had the opportunity to present the results of their research to their colleagues, exchange opinions, and consider a number of problems related to various areas of Turkic linguistics.

Permanent link to this publication: