Re: CHAT: Qipchaq as a lingua franca?

As someone aiming to become an expert on Kazak matters, perhaps I could
respond to this.  To qualify, my knowledge of the Kazaks comes from 1)
reading a lot of books, 2) speaking to a number of Kazaks, and 3) spending a
few months in Kazakstan.  I'm on my way back in less than a month, so I
might be able to get some more info.


From: "Danny Wier" <dawiertx@...>
Subject: CHAT: Qipchaq as a lingua franca?


> Pan-Turkism is alive and well.
Quite a bit.  Certainly there is a pan-Turkic feeling as opposed to any sort
of unity with the Slavs.  I spoke to a number of Turks (as in from Turkey)
in Kazakstan, and they had the same sort of impression - a definite sense of
kinship with the Kazaks.

> I just read in a Wikipedia article that a large number of Turkic people in
> Russia and other former Soviet republics are using a form of a West Turkic
> language, Qipchaq (or Kypchak), as a lingua franca. The language is called
> _yeni qipchaq_ (I think), currently written in the Cyrillic alphabet which
> is to be replaced by the Latin-Turkish alphabet. The languages united by
> this are Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Karakalpak, the Tatar dialects, Bashkir, Nogay
and
> Kumyk. This does not include Southern Turkic languages like Anatolian and
> Gagauz Turkish, Turkmen or Azeri; neither East Turkic languages like Uzbek
> and Uighur.
I've heard nothing of this, and I'd be surprised if Tatar, Bashkir, and the
like were included in something with Kazak and Kyrgyz.  The first three you
mentioned, Kazak, Kyrgyz, and Karakalpak, are mutually intelligible to some
degree, according to my sources.  As a beginning student of Kazak, Kyrgyz
isn't extremely far off, but it's certainly not the same.  I haven't had any
exposure to Karakalpak.

> (useful links snipped)
>
> Which means that all the West Turkic languages may essentially be
different
> dialects of the same language after all, like I kinda expected.
This is sort of what I'm getting at above.  The three Q's (Qazaq, Qârghâz,
and Qaraqalpaq*) are all basically dialects of the same West Turkic
continuum.  In Stalin's day, there was an intentional Soviet effort to
define these as different groups, including intentionally using different
orthographies for the various dialects.

> Anybody have more information on this? And could there be a lingua franca
> for Southern/Oghuz, Eastern/Chagatai and Northern Turkic languages? Will
> Bulgar/Chuvash be left out?
Don't know the answer to those.

> And are some nationalists proposing resurrecting the pre-Islamic Kök Turki
runes?

This I certainly didn't hear anything about.  Romanization seems to be the
nationalist position as far as writing systems are concerned.  Most
nationalist effort in Kazakstan seems to be Kazak or Pan-Turkic, rather than
Pan-Islamic, so the former Arabic-based system isn't even an option being
suggested.

If anyone wants to hear more about the ethnic/linguistic situation in
Kazakstan, let me know.  I'm always glad to blabber on about stuff like
this.

Sau bol,
Joe Fatula

---
*Қазақ, Қырғыз, Қарақалпақ

Replies