Humanities and Social Sciences

Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies

Content

Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies | 2022 | vol. LXXV | No 1

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This is a short overview of a Tatar journal Heberçı of 22 (+2 title) pages published in 1952 in Stockholm, the content, and the language features of which were unknown to the specialists up to now. It was called issue number 1. The publication was realized by a group of well-known Tatar writers, scientists and journalists who lived at that time in Sweden as immigrants. The copy of the journal which was at my disposal was received from Stockholm. The study of this bulletin may give new information about the duration of the keeping or not keeping of the immigrants’ mother tongue in a foreign language environment. Also, one can regard it as a source for research of the social status of the immigrants in Europe in the middle of the 20th century. This article will present the following: 1. an overview of the content of the bulletin, 2. an analysis of the language of the journal in comparison with the Modern literary Tatar language, 3. the translation into English of 2 texts from the bulletin and 4. 5 pages of facsimiles of the texts.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Iala Ianbay
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Jerusalem, Israel
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Professor Tadeusz Kowalski (1889–1948) was in correspondence with scholars from practically all over the world. He had an active interest in the developments of Oriental studies in the Soviet Union. He valued the publications he received from the USSR as well as all contacts he had with Russian researchers. He sought to cooperate with Alexander Samoylovich (1880–1938) – one of the most eminent Turkologists in the Soviet Union. This goal had been partially achieved. The archives of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in Kraków now hold, catalogued under ref. no. K III-4, j. 174, just three letters from the Russian Turkologist. These materials, despite their small number, are an engrossing source of knowledge on the state of Soviet Turkish studies in the mid-1920s and the Soviet Oriental studies community. As the author managed to determine, these letters are all the more precious as the branch of the archives at the Russian Academy of Sciences in St.-Petersburg, where the legacy of professor Samoylovich is kept, has no copies. Interestingly, there are no surviving copies of the letters from professor Kowalski to the Russian Turkologist. This article aims to analyse the contents of the letters written by Alexander Samoylovich, the Soviet Turkologist, to professor Tadeusz Kowalski, and determine the purpose and direction in which Turkish studies were developing in the USSR in the period described in these sources.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Izabela Kończak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Lodz, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper exemplifies chosen textual variants extant in Qur’an versions in the Islamic world, focusing on printed readings according to Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim and Warš ʿan Nāfiʿ, against the historical background of Ibn Muǧāhid’s qirā’āt reform (10th century C.E.). The studied issue is part of and sheds light on a broader problem – the quest after elaborating a critical text edition of the Qur’anic text based on the oldest and best manuscripts. The preliminary conclusion is that neither Ibn Muǧāhid nor the oldest, surviving works by Muslim scholars devoted to the Qur’anic qirā’āt did actually record the factual state of the oral tradition from the 7th century, but that the variants of the oral tradition as codified in the 10th century have their origin only in the late written tradition (probably also only from the 10th century, possibly not much older).
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marcin Grodzki
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Warsaw, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of this article is to characterize some lingual traits of the dialect spoken by ʽĪšɛ with regards to some selected socio-cultural aspects. ʽĪšɛ is a woman of more than one hundred years old, living in one of the villages of Testour district in North West Tunisia, accidently discovered by a Tunisian TV program in 2018. The examination being conducted here shows before all how ʽĪšɛ’s idiolect is strongly rooted in her geo-cultural environment, lingually and socially. Both similarities and differences between ʽĪšɛ’s idiolect and the General Tunisian as well as some other Tunisian dialects are also observed. What is more, ʽĪšɛ’s idiolect, living and intelligible beyond the boundaries of Tunisia up to present days, has stood thus the communicative test of time.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jamila Oueslati
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Foreskin, apart from its literal meaning, functions in Tanach also as a metaphor of blemish. Similarly, the circumcision is presented as a removal thereof. The perfecting function of the rite is visible in Second Temple texts, as well as in later tannaitic sources. The purpose of this paper is to analyze words of Jesus found in J 7:22–23 in the light of circumcision in the Hebrew Bible, understood as a ritual performed to remove a blemish. The conclusion is that Jesus’ words in the analyzed verses continue the biblical view, attesting to an exegetical trend visible in later Jewish sources.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jakub Pogonowski
1

  1. University of Warsaw, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The poetics of the Sanskrit ornate epic ( mahākāvya), recognized as the most prestigious genre of Sanskrit kāvya literature, significantly rely on literary devices creating the sense of grandeur. The aim of this study is investigate the notion of atiśaya discussed by early works on Sanskrit literary theory and to identify it as a focal term within a discourse explicating the poetics of grandeur characteristic of mahākāvya genre. The here introduced distinction between atiśaya and hyperbole enables to capture the specificity of literary grandeur in mahākāvya compositions and elucidates the broader matter of ‘excess’ in the Sanskrit literature.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ariadna Matyszkiewicz
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The use of foreign bases in derivation and compounding has led to the creation of a very young, but rapidly expanding, fourth sub-lexicon of Contemporary Korean – hybrids. Their growing number enhances the degree of hybridization within the Korean lexical subsystem. Hybrids, however, can also be coined be means of borrowed affixes. It is on these that this article will use to illustrate the growing influence the formation of the global communicative community exerts on Contemporary Korean. It will also address the reasons for borrowing these bound morphemes. Although Korean linguists generally deny the existence of foreign affixes in Korean, this article, based on an analysis of neologisms coined after 2000, will identify -reo, -ijeum, -iseuteu and anti- corresponding to English -er, -ism, -ist and anti-, respectively. Hybrid derivatives with foreign affixes may be treated as marginal, due to their relatively small morphological productivity, in comparison to other well-researched coinages. Nonetheless their existence and the growing popularity of Konglish might be perceived as the beginning of further and even more prominent changes to the Korean language, which in a long-term perspective may also influence the perception of the world by Korean speakers, since the national language not only stores the cultural and material values of the community but also a changing view of the world.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Borowiak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Precepts and taboos play a central role in the systematization of Daoist communities. On this set of rules hinges the development of various Daoist movements and the establishment of different Daoist schools. In this article, I investigate the proscriptions about the five pungent vegetables (wuxin 五辛 or wuhun 五葷, allium vegetables) consumption in Daoist early medieval prescription’s texts. Whereas previous scholarship has analyzed the influence of Buddhism in Daoist monastic rules, this paper turns the attention to the way in which the five pungent vegetables taboo was elaborated in Daoist discourse, especially in texts from the early medieval era. It argues that in Daoist prescription’s texts, the allium vegetables taboo is supported and justified by the aversive emotion of disgust. By describing the five pungent vegetables as polluted, defiled and even dangerous items, Daoist texts construct the perfect condition for their repulsion and the taboo's final systematization.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Filippo Costantini
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Costa Rica, UCR

Authors and Affiliations

Henryk Jankowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

Instructions for authors


INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS OF Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies


- Submitted papers will be subject to peer review by appropriate referees. The names of the reviewers and the results of their work are confidential data.

- The Publisher accepts complete scripts of the Work in *.doc. *.docx in addition to *.pdf format. All the special fonts used by the Author should be sent as an attachment to the text.

- We accept articles written in English, German and French.

- Every text should consist of a title in English (in case of articles written in German or French, there should be also the title in German or French), main body text, keywords (4-10), and an abstract in English (150 to 200 words).

- The Authors should provide their affiliation, ORCID number as well as footnotes and end of article bibliography, which should include only Latin letters.

- By submitting the text, the Author warrants to the Publisher:

1. That the Author is the sole author of the Work. Both ghostwriting and guest authorship are manifestations of scientific misconduct. All detected cases will be exposed and appropriate authorities will be informed;

2. That the Author holds the full power and authority to grant these rights;

3. That the Work has not been published in any form nor in any language with any company or person that may still own proprietary rights to the Work.

- By submitting the text, the Author grants, assigns, and transfers to the Publisher, during the full term of copyright and all renewals thereof, the sole and exclusive right to print, publish, distribute, market and sell the Work in any and all editions and formats throughout the World. The assignment is granted free of charge to Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies and shall be effective as long as it complies with the EU directives.

- The Author shall receive two free copies of the Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies issue in which the Work appears (the Author of a review shall receive one free copy).

- The Editor reserves the right to copyedit and proof texts accepted for the publication.

- After copyediting and final proofing, the text, in an electronic format, shall be sent to the Author for his approval. After revisions and clarifications (if necessary) the text must be submitted to the Editor as soon as possible.


Style of Reference

Style Sheet

Publication Ethics Policy

Publishing ethics

The Editorial Board of Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies urge the authors to present the results of their original work in a transparent and reliable way, thereby preventing any cases of ghostwriting and guest authorship (honorary authorship). The term ghostwriting describes a situation in which a person has significantly contributed to a publication without being listed as co-author or without his/her name being mentioned in the acknowledgement. Guest authorship, in turn, means that a person’s contribution to a publication is negligible or none at all, yet such a person is listed as co-author or author. In order to prevent these, relevant provisions have been included into the agreements signed with authors.


All the articles intended for publication in the journal are screened for plagiarism using the iThenticate software.


All cases of misconduct will be publicised by the Editorial Board, which includes notifying the relevant institutions (the authors’ employers, academic societies, etc.).


The editorial staff of Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies act in line with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. All parties involved in the publication process (the editor, the author, the reviewer, the publisher) should be familiar with ethical standards observed in the journal.

________________________________________

Duties of Editors:


1) The editors have the authority to decide which of the submitted papers should be accepted for publication (taking into account: the text conformity with the profile of the journal, the academic importance of the contribution, the originality as well as clarity of the input). When making decisions, the editor should be guided by the journal’s policy, as well as by legal regulations on matters such as infringement of copyright and plagiarism.

2) The editors assess the submitted manuscripts on basis of their scholarly merit, without regard to race, gender, sexual preferences, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the authors (fair play).

3) Unpublished articles, article excerpts, or materials contained therein may not be used by the editorial board or the editors for the purpose of their own research without the written consent of the authors. The editors do not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric, i.e. the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons. Authors should not be required to include references to the editors’ articles.

4) The editors do not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers, and – in special circumstances – other editorial staff. In exceptional circumstances, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.

5) The editors will safeguard the integrity of the published record, and publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions when needed. They will ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. The editorial board will require all collaborators to disclose any competitive interests and will make every effort to prevent it. If necessary, steps to be taken include retracting a manuscript or publishing a corrective statement.

6) The editor can retract an article when research results have already been published elsewhere; the manuscript contains plagiarism or otherwise breaches ethical principles; there is clear evidence that the results of research are unreliable or that data has been fabricated. A notification of manuscript retraction should be understood as a de facto removal of the text. Such a notification should inform for what reasons is the text being retracted.

7) The editors reserve the right to edit the texts for length, stylistic details, conformance with style guides etc.


________________________________________

Duties of Authors:



1) An author of the article is considered to be an individual who had a decisive influence on the final shape of the text in the version in which it is to be published. If more than one person has been involved in writing the text and/or in the research underlying it, the contributions of all persons should be specified in the statement submitted together with the manuscript.

2) The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.

3) An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable. Publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

4) When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to correct or retract the paper.

5) If any unethical conduct on the part of the author of the publication is revealed – such as plagiarism, data falsification or re-publication of a previously published work or part of it (the so-called self-plagiarism) – the editors ask such an author for explanations and then may take appropriate steps in line with the COPE guidelines. At a later stage of the proceedings, this may mean notifying the authorities of the author’s academic unit, rejecting a given article, and refusal to publish any future texts by that person in the journal.

6) In line with COPE guidelines, any change to authorship information requires written consent from all co-authors. This should be expressed by each author in a separate (electronic) letter of consent addressed to the editor-in-chief. The consent of all co-authors to changing authorship information of a submitted or already printed paper must take written form. If authors cannot reach agreement on this, they should consult the authorities of their home institution(s).

________________________________________

Duties of Reviewers:



1) Reviewers influence the decisions made by the editor-in-chief. Their comments on the subject matter can also help the authors improve their manuscripts.

2) In the reviews the quality of the reported research should be judged objectively. Reviewers should explain their judgment clearly and support it. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Authors have the right to respond to the critical remarks of reviewers.

3) A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should inform the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

4) If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates). Information or ideas obtained through peer review must not be used for the reviewer’s personal advantage.

5) Reviewers are obliged to submit their opinion statements timely. If for any reason (from scholarly ones to time pressure) they cannot meet the deadline or cannot undertake the reviewing at all, they should notify the editorial board immediately.

6) All materials sent for review should be treated as confidential. Disclosing their contents to third parties (with the exception of persons authorised) is inadmissible.

7) The principle of preventing conflicts of interest:


A conflict of interest exists when an author (or the research unit which he or she represents), a reviewer or an editor is engaged in personal or economic relations which may inappropriately influence his/her actions. Each author or reviewer noticing an existing conflict of interest is obliged to report it to the editors.

Peer-review Procedure


Review process

The manuscripts should be original and inventive, and significantly add to existing research.

Submitted articles will undergo a double, anonymous and independent peer-review process (the identity of the reviewed author will not be disclosed to reviewers, nor vice versa).

The articles under review are treated as confidential.

At least two reviewers will be appointed by the editors among specialists in fields related to the topic of the article.

The reviewers will not be members of the journal’s editorial staff and will not be affiliated with the same institution as the author. At least one reviewer will be affiliated to a foreign institution, other than the nationality of the author.

The editorial board will make an additional effort to select reviewers with no professional or private relationship with the author of the text being reviewed. The reviewers will be appointed in such a way as to avoid any conflict of interest (understood as relations between the author and the reviewer: personal relations like kinship, legal relations, conflict, subordination in a workplace; direct scholarly co-operation in the period of two years preceding the reviewing process).

The reviewers will provide an objective review of the submitted article. The review must contain an explicit conclusion stating whether the article should or should not be accepted for publication. The reviewers must disclose any irregularities that they discover, in particular any forms of plagiarism.

The evaluation is based on the following criteria: whether it is a new and original contribution, whether the paper’s title corresponds well to its content, whether the paper’s structure is clear and correct, whether the literature is quoted correctly and sufficiently.

The reviewers choose one of the following options: to accept the paper in its current form, to accept the paper with minor adjustments, to accept the paper with major changes and/or updates, or to reject the paper.

As a result of the review process, authors may be expected to modify their articles according to the recommendations of the reviewers. Amended articles could be accompanied by a cover letter explaining how the comments were addressed and the changes made.

Editorial board retains a right to publish, to reject or to return an article for modifications. In the event of an ambivalent publishing review, the text is submitted for another evaluation.

Articles on which two negative opinions have been passed will not be accepted for publication. The authors of negatively assessed texts will be notified as soon as the reviews reach the editorial board.

The list of reviewers will be published at the end of each year in one of Rocznik Orientalistyczny/Yearbook of Oriental Studies volumes.

A different review process conducted by the editorial board applies to book reviews.

There are no processing charges nor submission charges.


The review of an article submitted to Rocznik Orientalistyczny / Yearbook of Oriental Studies - form

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more