The Evolution Of Ancient Turkic Words In Modern Kazakh

Etymological studies of Kazakh language have been based mainly on a diversified range of Old Turkic texts, among which the Old Turkic inscriptions have been studied for more than 100 years. Still, Old Turkic itself, a comparison between Old Turkic and modern Turkic languages and the evolution process from Old Turkic to modern languages remains open to further investigation.This thesis aims to discover how Old Turkic lexicon evolved to modern Kazakh, through a detailed description of Old Turkic corpora and a comparison between these two languages in relation to the lexical form and meaning of these two languages, i.e. the change in sounds, phonological and lexical structures, lexical meanings and morphology. For lexemes identified as originated in Old Turkic, we tried to clarify the process of change they have undergone.This study includes an intruduction, a main body and an appendix.In the introduction a brief account is given as to the aim, significance, methodology and the state of the art of Kazakh etymology research carried out to this day at home and abroad. Other related linguistic studies are also reviewed in this part.The main body of this paper consists of four chapters.The first part (ch.2) is an brief descripton of Kazakh phonological change since Old Turkic period. Subtitles include:Phonetic Correspondences between Old Turkic and Kazakh, Haplology and Epenthesis, Effects of Sound Change to Kazakh Lexical Development and Patterns of Sound Correspondences. Under the first subtitle (§2.1-2), we made a detailed comparision through solid examples between the phonological systems of the two languages and tried to show the regular sound correspondances as a result of phonetic differatiation, convergence and shift. We demonstrated the counterpart of each phoneme of Old Turkic in Kazakh ponological system. In Haplology and Epenthesis (§2.3), all phenomena in case are exemplified. Changes in vowels and consonants and their effects in the development of Kazakh lexical items are investigated under the last subtitle (§2.4). A detailed description is given as to how sound changes affect the specific forms of Kazakh lexemes. In the end of this chapter, a full enumeration is given of the regular and irregular sound change patterns, an explanation is also addressed as to how irregularities come about.The second and third parts (ch.3 and ch.4), as the major contents of this study, involve a comparative study of change in lexical structure between the aforementioned two languages, with lexemes taken from a wide range of Old Turkic texts, dictionaries and related studies. We identified a list of Old Turkic stems which remain productive in Kazakh word formation. These stems are classified into groups according to their syllable numbers and segmented into morphemes. Then the behavior of these morphemes in Kazakh are observed. Target lexical items are listed, each followed by frequent Old Turkic cognates and/or their inflected forms. What follows is an comparison between these lexical materials. Then, word formation process of Old Turkic basic morphemes is analyzed according to phonetic, semantic and morpho-syntactic criteria. The last step is to identify Kazakh lexemes formed through the aforementioned process.Another topic tackled in this study is the development of Old Turkic idioms and compound words and the roles of the stems therein in the process of word formation. Also investigated and compared is the structures and meanings of idioms and compounds, their survival or extinction, the change in structure and meaning, etc. we tried, in order to discover the developments within Kazakh itself, to exemplify the diachronic changes in lexical meaning such as extension, narrowing, transfer and change in affective meaning. In the end of each subtitle, an overview is made to demonstrate our major observations.The 5th chapter consists of four parts.In the first part, we grouped into different "lexical sets" Kazakh lexemes which originate in Old Turkic. Following is a definition of the term "lexical set" and a description of its features. We showed through examples how some lexemes can and should be ascribed to a certain set and tried to explain how this became possible. Two criteria apply in this respect-phonetic change and semantic change. Based on the understanding of Old Turkic sound change rules, we can be sure of the relatedness as to lexemes which share similar phonetic features and related meanings. Semantic relationships between certain Kazakh lexemes are discovered through a diachronic approach to the investigation of semantic relations. Finally, to gain a deeper understanding of Kazakh lexical sets, we analyzed some specific sound changes and how these changes are reflected in Kazakh lexical sets.The 2nd part deals with the origin of fossilized lexemes in Kazakh, which are meaningless in their own right and thus cannot stand alone, their original forms, meanings and functions are discussed here.In the 3rd and 4th parts we came to the conclusion that some Kazakh suffixes and postpositions originate in Old Turkic lexical words. It necessarily follows that Old Turkic lexicon affects not only the lexicon of Kazakh but also its grammar, at least to a certain degree.In this chapter we also investigated synchronically the sound correspondences between the variants existent in Kazakh dialects and compared, diachronically this time, these correspondences with those between Old Turkic and Kazakh. Through theses comparisons we gain a picture of how Old Turkic phonemes survive in different dialects. We studied the survivals of Old Turkic lexemes and discovered the unevenness in distribution (e.g., some Old Turkic lexemes remain the same in some dialects but changed in many others). Here we tried to discover the underlying motivation of this unevenness.To summarize, this dissertation is a study of Old Turkic lexicon, especially in its lexical and grammatical meaning, and its development into Kazakh lexicon. We investigated lexical development and motivations underlying that, with more efforts paid to the observation of stem productivity in word formation and limitations to lexical change. Through this study, I believe, we gain some sound understanding of the development of Kazakh lexicon. In addition, we discovered the etymology of a great many Kazakh lexemes and the etymological relations between them. Generally speaking, we demonstrated a fact, from a different angle, that the key to the development of Kazakh is the competition and cooperation between linguistic elements available.Study of lexical development from Old Turkic to modern Kazakh is not new, but has been generally based on limited corpora, hence far from being systematic or theoretically enlightening. Through a diachronic comparison between Old Turkic and modern Kazakh, in addition to a synchronic comparison, where necessary, among modern languages we hope this study makes a sound reference to further studies of Kazakh etymology and we believe this dissertation is of great theoretical significance in relation to diachronic comparative Turkic language studies and the history of Kazakh language.