ОРХОН-ЕНИСЕЙДЕГІ КӨМЕКШІ СӨЗДЕР: ДАМУЫ МЕН КОНЦЕПЦИЯ МӘСЕЛЕЛЕРІ (ТАРИХИ-САЛЫСТЫРМАЛЫ АНАЛИЗ)

2025

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.62724/202510205
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The article presents the first historical and comparative study of auxiliary words (adverbs, auxiliary nouns, auxiliary verbs, modal words) in ancient Turkic runic inscriptions, comparing them with medieval and modern Turkic languages. It contributes to linguistics by analyzing these words through studies, statistical analysis, and theoretical justifications, with a focus on auxiliary verbs found in the Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions. The research covers nine large and several small Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions to identify and categorize the function words used in ancient Turkic. The study compares the auxiliary words in ancient Turkic with those in medieval and modern Turkic languages, revealing their morphological and phonetic similarities and differences. Additionally, differences between the eastern and western Hunnic Turkic languages are highlighted. The study finds that while the auxiliary word group is common in related Turkic languages, they belong to different categories, show variations in word formation, and have different names. A key result is that the auxiliary words in ancient Turkic runic inscriptions are substantively similar to those in medieval and modern Turkic languages. The primary language of the study is Kazakh, a closely related Turkic language. The article also discusses how some morphemes in Kazakh have lost their original meaning, leading to the formation of a new group of words with merged roots and morphemes, which are now categorized as auxiliary words.