Scholarly article on topic 'The Mutual Enrichment of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages in the Period of Globalization'

The Mutual Enrichment of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages in the Period of Globalization Academic research paper on "Computer and information sciences"

Share paper
{"Turkic Languages" / "All-Turkic terminological fund" / Anglicisms / Globalization}

Abstract of research paper on Computer and information sciences, author of scientific article — Gulzhan Doszhan

Abstract The present time internationalisms, especially Anglicism's are a rich source for development and enrichment of vocabulary of all modern Turkic languages in the process of the international cooperation and interpenetration of culture and civilization. This paper presents results of historical and sociolinguistic analysis on the process of systematization and unification of national terms and borrowings in Turkic languages. The author notes the importance of strengthening ties of Turkic peoples in the period of globalization, being based on worldwide experience of cooperation of kindred languages, to develop a strategy for mutual enrichment of Turkic languages through creation of all-Turkic terminological fund.

Academic research paper on topic "The Mutual Enrichment of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages in the Period of Globalization"

Available online at


Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 89 (2013) 806 - 811

2nd Cyprus International Conference on Educational Research, (CY-ICER 2013)

The Mutual Enrichment of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages in the Period of Globalization

Gulzhan Doszhana*

aL.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, 5 Munaitpassov Str., Astana, 010000, Republic of Kazakhstan


The present time internationalisms, especially Anglicism's are a rich source for development and enrichment of vocabulary of all modern Turkic languages in the process of the international cooperation and interpenetration of culture and civilization. This paper presents results of historical and sociolinguistic analysis on the process of systematization and unification of national terms and borrowings in Turkic languages. The author notes the importance of strengthening ties of Turkic peoples in the period of globalization, being based on worldwide experience of cooperation of kindred languages, to develop a strategy for mutual enrichment of Turkic languages through creation of all-Turkic terminological fund.

© 2013The Authors.PublishedbyElsevierLtd.

Selectionand/orpeer-reviewunder responsibilityofProf. Dr.HuseyinUzunboylu,NearEast University,FacultyofEducation, Cyprus

Keywords: Turkic Languages, all-Turkic terminological fund, Anglicisms, globalization;


In recent years there is an apparent increase in interest of linguists to comparative study of lexicology of genetic and typologically related languages. Related nations close on origin have kindred languages, glossary and grammar of which are close to each other than to the other languages. Thus, all Turks speak kindred languages as all Turkic languages originated from one common base language - common Turkic language.

The objective of this study is historical and sociolinguistic analysis on the process of mutual enrichment of vocabulary of Turkic languages and this objective conditioned the setting of the following goals:

- To describe a brief history of the development of terminological fund of Turkic languages;

- To consider the specificity process of words penetration from west-European languages in different periods of development of Turkic languages;

* Corresponding author: Gulzhan Doszhan. Tel.: +7 7026660815. E-mail address:

1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu, Near East University, Faculty of Education, Cyprus doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.936

- To show main historical and sociolinguistic aspects of mutual enrichment of vocabulary of modern Turkic languages in a context of globalization processes.

To achieve the objective and assigned tasks, the following work was conducted by means of:

- A review of special and terminological literature on the topic of the study;

- An analysis of modern tendencies of concerted actions of Turkic states on creation of all-Turkic terminological

- Determination of periods of influence of English language in the history of formation and development of literary Turkic languages;

- Revelation and description of lexical-semantic groups of borrowed lexemes inside the range of terminological groups of modern Turkic languages exposed to maximum influence by English.

2.Theoretical and methodological basis for analysis

In any area of human activity one of the key problems is the common conceptual base and a corresponding special thematic terminology. The issue on preparation of sectorial terminological dictionaries is the one of the vital ones in modern linguistics. This issue is discussed in papers of the leading domestic and foreign scientists during several decades as it is closely connected with such problems as a status of the term and its place in language system, consistency of terminology, semantic and pragmatic peculiarities of national and international terms.

The theoretic and methodological basis of the study include works of modern linguists on general and Turkic linguistics, on theory of terms and borrowings, on sociolinguistics, prepared by using materials about languages of various system. The theoretical basis was prepared based on ideas and views of such scientists as W. Humboldt (2000), D.Winford (2003), M. Sebastian (2008), E. Keenan (2003), Fromkin (1978), N.A. Baskakov (1988), D.S. Lotte (1961), G.H. Ahatov (1987), K. Acar (2004), B.Brendemoen (1998), E.Haugen (1950), I. Ayturk (2008), A. Baitursynov (1926), S. Kenesbayev (1962), K. Zhubanov (1966), K. Ahanov (1973), U. Aitbayev (2007), Sh. Kurmanbayuly (2009), M. Kul-Muhammed (2011) as well as papers of other linguists involved with problems of interlinguistic contacts.

To solve the tasks assigned in this paper, I used descriptive and comparative methods: the first one was used for selection and classification of language materials, the second one was used as the basis to establish lexico-semantic interlinguistic ties between lexical items; method of componential analysis was used to fix the limits of subject of study; methods of classification and systematization were also used in this paper as well as methods of linguistic observation and correlation in diachronic aspect.

Among the linguists of the XX century the terminologist M. V. Leichik gave the most suitable definition on the concept «term», such as: «the term is the lexical unit of the certain language for special purposes denoting the common - certain or abstract - notion of the theory of certain special field of knowledge or activity» (Leychik, 1989).

In Soviet linguistics there are two main approaches known in the study of the term: normative and descriptive. At normative approach the term is considered as a lexical unit of certain type with the special semantic and grammatical structure which distinguishes it from the words of common-literary language. The followers of normative approach worked out requirements to the term, the essence of which lies in the fact that such term shall be monosemantic, clear, systematic, brief and without synonyms (Lotte, 1961; Kandelaki, 1979; Kiyak, 1989; Tatarinov, 1994). In their studies the term is presented not as dynamic element, functioning in living speech and, therefore, being subject to changes, but as a static element of the sphere of fixation. Such term is called «an ideal term» in linguistic literature.

By studying of the term in the area of its functioning, the followers of descriptive approach cast doubts on appropriateness to impose requirements to terms as to static element of the sphere of fixation (Vinokur, 1939; Golovin, 1971; Danilenko, 1971). The specificity of the term, in their opinion, consists in the fact that the term is not a specific word, but just a word in a special function. It means that any word can be the term, and any term can pass to the sphere of commonly used vocabulary. Distinctions between the term and the word in non-terminological use lie not in the sphere of their functioning. In this respect, the term being the linguistic unit belongs to language and abides by its laws, modifying in each specific case, so it can be polysemic; it is peculiar for it to have synonyms,

antonyms and phrases when expressing the defined notion. Modern studies confirm the Tightness of the followers of descriptive approach and I share their opinions in relation to the object under consideration - the term - in full.

In theoretical aspect, research of terminology is closely connected with problems of borrowings. According to the definition proposed by M. Sebastian: «Borrowing is a common outcome of prolonged language contact in which elements of one language are incorporated into another language; these elements can range from the level of individual sounds to larger morphological or syntactic structures» (Sebastian, 2009).

The word falling within the foreign language environment loses contact with the words of its native language and is subordinate to lexical regularities of the borrowing language in its further development. It is expressed in the fact that this word gradually becomes more and more commonly used in this language; it gains the capacity to word formation, develops polysemy, is freely combined with words of original vocabulary and enters the composition of phraseological units.

By taking into consideration all of the issues mentioned above, I can emphasize the following features of lexical assimilation of borrowed words:

1. Borrowed words tend to lose their primary etymologic meanings peculiar to them in the source language, which is usually accompanied by the loss of their former conceptual ties as well as their inner form;

2. Further development of these words is going in accordance with the laws of development of vocabulary of this language, that is expressed in semantic and stylistic differentiation of borrowings under the influence of synonymous vocabulary of the borrowing language and in appearance of new figurative meanings which are absent to the corresponding words in the source language;

3. Degree of combination of borrowings with the words of native language and their ability to enter phraseological units;

4. Development of word-formation efficiency of borrowed words in English language;

5. Borrowed words acquire a nationwide usage up to their inclusion into basic word stock of this language.

Borrowed words from the European languages are mainly based on terminological component of Turkic

languages. Lately, the language tendency shows that generally English fills a terminological niche of the all Turkic languages. Anglicisms in Turkic languages develop multiple groups of lexical units by thematic and semantic diversities. The most important factor in mastering English words is a necessity to denote new realities in a borrowing language. Appearing new scientific and technical inventions are in need of their own name.

3. A Brief History of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages

According to the results of researches of one of the modern scientists of Kazakhstan Kul-Muhammed it is possible to find such interesting facts on the history of Turkic languages: «Many world-renowned linguists believe that Turkic languages have a clear common origin with the language of the ancient Sumerians, the Etruscans and even the Mayan language, which today is almost unquestioned. Language can be likened to a family tree book, in which the national history is depicted by the universe of words and meanings. Studies of genetic and typological links between related languages allow visualizing and objectively reconstructing a picture of ethnic groups, development of nations. Moreover, if to take into account that the nations and ethnicities of the Altaic language family (including along with the Turkic language, Mongolian, Manchu-Tungus, and even Japanese and Korean) in the second millennium BC spoke the same language, and that the Altaic family and the world's most widespread Indo-European family make up single Nostratic macrofamily, it is easy to suggest a «linguistic roar» in the history of the Eurasian supercontinent and whose «tamgas» determined its major landmark milestones.

Language and nation are inseparable concepts, and therefore a language's ups and downs naturally depend on the vitality of the people creating it. The language of growing and developing nation is thriving, where in a dying nation the language disappears. The linguistic theory has long had an eerie term «dead languages» including not only the languages of small nations and tribes, but also great ones in terms of their place and role in the history of planetary civilization, like Sanskrit, Coptic, Avestan, Hun and even Latin. While calling these languages absolutely hopeless and lifeless would not be quite true: despite the fact that they have long fallen into disuse and no one speaks them, these languages are the progenitors, historical antecedents and fertile ground for many new and modern languages» (Kul-Muhammed, 2011).

National terminological fund of Turkic languages is rich in vernacular words and terms. But the policy of Russification of the Soviet Union principally changed the functional nature and main terminographical norms and alphabetic system of Turkic languages. This is evidenced by opinion of the scientist A.Y. Musorin: «The languages of people of the former USSR can be considered as the language union. Long coexistence of these languages within

the framework of one multinational state and the immense pressure on them by Russian resulted in common features at all levels of their language system. Thus, such previously missed phones as [$], [x], [^ appeared in Udmurt influenced by Russian, many adjectives in Komi-Permyak started to be used with the suffix «-oboh» (Russian: -OBHi, -OBaa, -oBoe), and the types of complex sentences previously missed inTuvinian were developed. The Russian language significantly affected lexis. Almost the whole socio-political and scientific terminological system in the languages of people of the former USSR was borrowed from Russian or developed under its strong influence. Only languages of the Baltic states - Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian - are exceptions. The corresponding terminological systems had been developed in these languages in many ways before Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia entered into a part of the USSR» (Musorin, 2004: 196).

For the last 20 years the diapason of social work of Turkic languages is considerably extended. That is why the majority of lexical structure of Turkic languages is being changed. These changes are closely connected with political, social, technical and cultural spheres of Turkic states. In this regard the lexical fund of the mentioned languages is filled with international words. Especially professional lexis and term system are being intensively developed, political-social terminology is being formed, the meanings of many terms and loan words are being extended, and cultural, scientific, economical and other new words (neologisms) are appeared.

4. The Development of Terminological Fund of Turkic Languages in the Conditions of Globalization

The end of XX and beginning of XXI centuries were marked in the world by dramatically intensified globalization process. World community experiences a complex stage of all social processes, which in particular is conditioned also by the development of information technologies. Globalization covered economical, political and cultural spheres of the society. This phenomenon is discussed in all branches of modern science: sociology, culture, political science, and, of course, in linguistics.

In this connection, K. Khanazarov, a well-known scientist on linguistic philosophy, considers that «Globalization is an objective process that by no means is aimed at causing damage to the existing languages. However, it breaks the basis of languages by its speed-up and expansion, destroys the foundation on which thousands of languages are based especially languages of small nations, folks, tribes and ethnic groups» (Khanazarov, 2007: 134)

English is a motive power of globalization and information therefore it is called «global language». One of the criterions of globalization of English is quickly spreading Anglicism's, which bear valuable installations of the West European culture. In this way the world and national mass media is a spreader of Anglicism's in all languages.

Turkic languages have much in common both with grammatical system and lexical structure. Similarity of Turkic languages enables each Turkic language to be mutually enriched with the vernacular words among themselves. However, they did not always have an opportunity to be mutually enriched at various stages of the complex history.

In June 1924, during the First Congress of Kazakh Intelligence which congregated in Orenburg, the founder of the Kazakh linguistics Ahmet Baitursynov has proved how the words of Turkic people could be used and noted that: «In absence of the necessary terms in Kazakh, they should be borrowed from the languages kindred to Kazakh. It is performed on the following grounds:

1) Although the most of words of the kindred languages do not have the common forms but have the common roots, so they are easily understood, heard and they are not as strange for pronunciation as a word of non-kindred language;

2) Turkic people had and have the continuous communication among themselves, and therefore the most of the words of one language can be known for the representatives of another language without any common roots» (Kurmanbayuly, 2001: 30).

After the long time, the first attempts to facilitate in collaboration of Turkic-language countries in this regard were taken in 1999 when a special task group was established through the help of the Turkish Information Society. October 2001, the First Turcological Forum was arranged with regard to the collaboration in information technologies. Later on, the meetings in Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan were arranged with regard to various spheres of terminology. In 2011 the 9th Forum of Terminologists of Turkic Countries was arranged in Astana by the Committee on Languages of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Kazakhstan together with the Turkey Committee on Languages and Turkish Society of Information Technology. The Turkologists gathered at the forum to try and strengthen ties of fraternal peoples in science and, basing on worldwide experience of cooperation of kindred languages, develop a strategy for borrowing and unifying terminology; create a common fund of industry terminology, especially in information technology.

In recent years the idea of the creating of the common Turkic terminological fund gained a new impulse. To it promoted establishment Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States (CCTS) in 2009 as an international intergovernmental organization, with the overarching aim of promoting comprehensive cooperation among Turkic States. Its four founding member States are Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey. Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan abstained from accession to this organization.

In May 25, 2010 in Astana President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev and President of Turkey Abdullah Gul opened the new research center - Turkic academy. The initiative of establishment of Turkic academy which would be engaged in studying and research of language, history and culture of the Turkic people, belongs to the Kazakhstan leader and to them for the first time was stated in October, 2009 at the IX summit of Heads of the Turkic countries in Nakhichevan (Azerbaijan).

In consideration of the recommendations by the Council of Wise Men, which serves as the advisory board of the CCTS, terminology committee was set up with the participation of academics from the member states of this organization in 2012. First Meeting of the Terminology Committee, founded with a view of convergence among national languages of the Turkic Council, was held in Istanbul on November 16, 2012.The Meeting brought together scholars commissioned by the Governments as national representatives as well as experts from member states of Turkic council, Turkic academy, heads and analysts of Turkic linguistic structures.

Participants elaborated on the basic principles of developing common terminology and agreed that the related academic endeavors should be collected under a single roof and expedited. Other issues agreed upon during the Meeting include preparation of a glossary of common terms and an illustrated explanatory dictionary of common words as well as further improvement of the Comparative Dictionary of Turkic Languages. It is expected that the Committee will convene several times a year and the organizational actions in the sphere of all-Turkic terminology will be carried out by the Turkic Academy.

5. Conclusion

The most important reasons for penetration and use of the words and terms borrowed from English in modern Turkic languages have extra linguistic nature. However, intra linguistic factors aren't an exception. Owing to distinctions of graphic bases of the alphabets and pronunciation norms of Turkic languages, the level of phonetic, grammatical and semantic assimilation of loan words and terms in these languages are not identical. Because of incomplete morpho-phonological and graphic adaptation of loan words, it becomes clear that in the Turkic languages national coloring, phonetic and orthographic norms of these languages are partly changed. The establishing a common alphabet space and all-Turkic terminological fund can solve this problem.


Leychik, V. (2009) Предмет, методы и структура терминоведения (Subject, methods and structure of terminology.) Moscow: URSS. Lotte, D.S. (1961) Основы построения научно-технической терминологии (Bases of creation of scientific and technical terminology.) Moscow: AN SSSR.

Kandelaki, T. L. (1979) Терминологическая работа в системе научных учреждений АН СССР (Terminological work in the system of

scientific institutions of AS of the USSR) Voprosy yazikoznaniya 5, 123-132. Kiyak, T. R. (1989) Лингвистические аспекты терминоведения (Linguistic aspects of a terminology) Kiev: UMK VO.

Tatarinov, V.A. (1994) История отечественного терминоведения. Классики терминоведения: Очерк и хрестоматия (The History of

National Terminology. Scholars of Terminology: essay and reader) Moscow: Moskovskiy litsey. Vinokur, G.O. (1939) О некоторых явлениях словообразования в русской технической терминологии: Сб. статей по языкознанию (About

some phenomena of word-formation in Russian technical terminology: The collection of articles on linguistics). pp. 5-6. Golovin, B. N. (1971) О некоторых аспектах лингвистического и информационного изучения термина (About some aspects of linguistic and informational studying of term.) Материалы научного симпозиума: «Семиотические проблемы языков науки, терминологии и информатики». (The materials of a scientific symposium «Semiotics Problems of Languages of Science, Terminology and Informatics»). (p. 64). Moscow: MGU.

Danilenko, V.P. (1971) Исследования по русской терминологии (Researches on the Russian terminology). Сборник статей (The collection of articles).

Sebastian, M. (2009) The History of Arabic Loanwords in Turkish. Kul-Muhammed,Mukhtar (2011) Treasury of the Kazakh language.

Musorin A.Y. (2004) Основы науки о языке (Science bases about language) Educational supply. (p.196). Novosibirsk. Novosibirskoe knijnoe izdatelstvo.

Khanazarov, K.K. (2007) К проблеме развития философии языка (The problems of development of philosophy of language.) (p.134) Tashkent: «Uzbekistan».

Kurmanbayuly, Sh. (2001) Туыстас тглдерге ортац терминологиялыц цор цажет (It is necessary to create common terminological fund for related languages) «Мемлекетпк тшдщ колданылу аясын кецейту мэселелерЬ» гылыми-практикальщ конференция материалдары. (Materials of scientific-practical conference «Problems of expansion of the sphere of use of a state language») (p. 30). Kokshetau: Kokshe-polygrafia.