Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 2
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Slavic‑Turkish linguistic relations are generally only discussed unilaterally, focusing on the Turkish influence on Slavic and neglecting the opposite direction. Thus far, no more than two relatively extensive essays (the larger one counting 44 pages) have been devoted to Slavic loanwords in Turkish. The present paper aims to outline the state of research on this topic. It begins with a comparison of the two essays, then it examines several of somewhat atypical words, as well as a handful of suffixes, and it closes with a very brief presentation of the Slavic influence on case government of Gagauz verbs.
Go to article

Bibliography

Dybo A. V., 2000, Turkic Languages and Slavic, „Encyclopedia of Slavic Languages and Linguistics Online”, ed. Marc L. Greenberg, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2589-6229_ESLO_COM_032504, (dostęp 10.08.2020).
Foy K., 1898, Der Purismus bei den Osmanen, „Mittheilungen des Seminars für orientalische Sprachen an der königlichen Friedrich Wilhelms‑Universität zu Berlin. 2. Abt.”, vol. 1, S. 20–55.
Gülsevin G., 2009, Rumeli Türkçesi çerçevesinde Türk ve Balkan dillerinin etkileşimi, „Turkish Studies”, vol. 4, s. 48–64.
Gülsevin G., 2017, XVII. yüzyıl Batı Rumeli Türkçesi ağızları, Ankara.
Hazai G., 1961, Remarques sur les rapports des langues slaves des Balkans avec le turc‑osmanli, „Studia Slavica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae”, vol. 7, pp. 97–138.
KEWT = Stachowski M., 2019a.
Kowalski T., 1933, Les Turcs et la langue turque de la Bulgarie du Nord‑Est, Kraków.
Meninski F. à Mesgnien, 1680, Thesaurus Linguarum Orientalium, Viennae.
Miklosich F., 1889, Die slavischen, magyarischen und rumunischen Elemente im türkischen Sprachschatze, Wien.
Rocchi L., 2014, I repertori lessicali turco‑ottomani di Giovan Battista Montalbano (1630 ca.), Trieste.
Rusek J., 1997, O nazwach kapusty (Brassica oleracea) w językach słowiańskich, „Rocznik Slawistyczny”, t. 50, s. 53–61.
Sawicka I., (w druku), Rozważania o tureckich sufiksach w języku macedońskim.
Stachowski K., 2008, Names of cereals in the Turkic languages, Kraków.
Stachowski K., 2009, The discussion on consonant harmony in Northwestern Karaim, „Türkbilig”, vol. 18, pp. 158–193.
Stachowski M., 2016, Case shifts and case syncretism in Gagauz in the context of Bulgarian patterns, „Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları”, vol. 26/2, pp. 265–275.
Stachowski M., 2019a, Kurzgefaßtes etymologisches Wörterbuch der türkischen Sprache, Kraków.
Stachowski M., 2019b, Slavic languages in contact, 2: Are there Ottoman Turkish loanwords in the Balkan Slavic languages?, „Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis”, vol. 136, pp. 99–105.
Tietze A., 1957, Slavische Lehnwörter in der türkischen Volkssprache, „Oriens”, vol. 10, S. 1–47.
Tietze A., 1999, Wörterbuch der griechischen, slavischen, arabischen und persischen Lehnwörter im Anatolischen Türkisch, İstanbul.
Yüksel Z., 1989, Polatlı Kırım Türkçesi ağzı, Ankara.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marek Stachowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Evliya Çelebi’s Seyāḥatnāme, i.e. ‘Book of Travels’, contains, among others, a handful of Slavic words that are marked as Ukrainian. As a matter of fact, some of them display mixed features, probably resulting from the contamination of Ukrainian and Russian variants. Such hybrid words (e.g., [9] below) are attested together with purely Ukrainian (e.g., [2]) and purely Russian (e.g., [18]) forms. This situation prompted this author to classify Evliya Çelebi’s lexical materials as surzhyk vocabulary and, thus, antedate the emergence of surzhyk (see section 3).
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marek Stachowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more