Tatar Language

The article reflects the results of an ethnosociological study of the situation with ethnocultural education in the south of the Tyumen region. The analysis of historical processes showed that in the 20s–40s of the 20th century in Tatar educational institutions, instruction was conducted in the Old Tatar language, which was understandable to the majority of
Siberian Tatars. However, after turning from the Old Tatar to the Tatar language of the Middle Volga region (Tatar literary), the situation changed. There were difficulties with the students perception of the language that was nonnative for them. It has been established that longterm teaching in the national schools of the Tatar literary language did not bring significant results. Siberian Tatars continued to use native and Russian languages in everyday life. The study of the current situation has revealed, on the one hand, the interest of students and their
parents in studying the SiberianTatar language, on the other – the unwillingness of the heads of education administration bodies to change the established system. The main conclusion of the study is the need for a gradual full or partial reorientation of the educational process in
Tatar schools in the south of the Tyumen region towards the language and literature of Siberian Tatars.

Elinizdeki eser, 1996 yılında Kazan’da basılmış olan « Min Tukayga Kilem » adlı eserde yer alan ünlü Tatar şairi Abdullah Tukay için ölümünden sonra yazılmış şiirlerin Türkiye Türkçesine aktarılmasıyla oluşturulmuştur. Elbetteki Tukay’ın arkasından yazılan veya söylenen şiirler bu kadar değildir. Ama bu kitapta yerli ve yabancı pek çok meşhur şairin Tukay için yazdığı şiirler yer almaktadır. Kitaptaki şiirlerde Tukay’ın sanatıyla birlikte onun yoksulluk içinde geçen hayatı da konu edilmiş, o, çektiği sıkıntılarla da şairlerin odak noktası olmuştur. Özellikle de çektiği sıkıntılara ve hastalığına bakmayarak halkını düşünmesi, halkı için uğraşması, şiir ve yazılarında toplumsal konulara yer vermesi takdir edilecek bir durumdur. Bu yönleriyle de şiirlere konu olmuştur Tukay...

В коллективной монографии публикуются результаты исследований, посвященных взаимосвязи идентичностей и языков как ценностей российского общества и его символических маркеров. Мониторинг языковой ситуации, этнического и иного культурного многообразия России выполнен сотрудниками Института этнологии и антропологии Российской академии наук и экспертами Сети этнологического мониторинга и раннего предупреждения конфликтов (EAWARN). Исследователи не ставили перед собой задачу изучения языковедческих сюжетов, а предприняли попытку анализа социальных аспектов функционирования языков. Помимо научной задачи проект имел
практикоориентированную цель разработки предложений по совершенствованию государственной национальной политики в регионах Российской Федерации. Для специалистов в области межнациональных отношений, языковой, образовательной и ми-
грационной политики, ученых гуманитарной сферы и представителей общественных организаций этнокультурной направленности.

The article deals with the problems of preservation of their native language by the Siberian Tatars at the present stage of historical development. The brief overview presents the stages of studying the Siberian Tatar language from the beginning of the 19th century to the beginning of the 21st century. Based on commonly known sources and literature, it is shown that the ethnonym Tatars, which refers to ethnic communities of different origins in the Volga region, the Urals and Western Siberia, is a pseudo-ethnonym. It was introduced as the self-name of the Volga Turks by the Kazan Muslim educator Sh. Mardzhani, and in Soviet times it became a fulcrum for the creation of a new literary language and its inclusion in the educational programs of all “Tatar” schools of the Soviet Union. At the same time, it was not taken into account that Siberian Tatars are an independent ethnic group, with their own unique language and culture. The main conclusion of the article is that today Siberian Tatars face a difficult choice – to keep or to lose their native language. Preserving the language at the family level is clearly not
enough. Therefore, it is necessary to teach it in schools, propagate it in the media, and publish fiction in it. The first methodological developments in the form of grammar, phonetics, graphics, dictionaries, as well as literary works are already available. It is possible to introduce the studyтof the Siberian Tatar language as an option in national schools and in special courses at the city Centers of Siberian Tatar culture. At present, the work to preserve the Siberian Tatar language and culture is carried out only by enthusiasts. It does not receive support at the administration level. Relying on the old, time-tested programs and methodological developments in the Tatar language and literature, the heads of education authorities do not see the need for studying the Siberian Tatar language and developing Siberian Tatar literature. In our opinion, further ignoring of the existing problem will entail increased marginalization of the Siberian Tatars of the Tyumen region and their gradual loss of self-identification.

The present volume continues the thematic series “Typology of morphosyntactic parameters”. Parametric description of grammatical systems is a priority field of research in linguistic typology and grammar theory. Grammar as the most regular component of linguistic structure provides the best opportunity in modeling universal characteristics of a human language on the basis of a limited number of factors. This volume is primarily dedicated to the interaction of grammar mechanisms and to interface phenomena — syntax-prosody interface, syntax-semantics interface, information structure-syntax interface. The volume presents two types of research articles: those discussing general characteristics of languages sharing the same combination of parameters and those investigating the interrelation of the universal and language-specific features in the grammar of a given language.
Настоящий выпуск продолжает серию тематических публикаций «Типология морфосинтаксических параметров». Параметрическое описание грамматических систем языков мира является приоритетным направлением лингвистической типологии и теории грамматики. Именно в области грамматики как самого регулярного компонента языка общие закономерности устройства языковой системы оказываются наиболее наглядными и поддающимися моделированию при помощи сравнительно небольшого количества факторов. Центральной темой выпуска является взаимодействие механизмов грамматики и проблема языковых интерфейсов — просодико-синтаксического, коммуникативно-синтаксического, семантико-грамматического. Представлены статьи двух типов — исследования, где на основе эксплицитного сопоставления материала большого числа языков устанавливаются общие признаки класса языков, соответствующих заданной комбинации параметров, и работы, где обсуждается соотношение универсального и лингвоспецифического компонентов в грамматике конкретных языков мира.

As is well known, the three Turkic dialectal continua — Tatar-Bashkir,
Shor-Khakass-Chulym, and Karachay-Balkar ones — have developed quite distinctive reflexes of proto-Turkic palatal *j- and *č-, *-č(-). While compiling the Dialectological Atlas of Russia’s Turkic Languages, the authors were able to compose exact isoglosses of *j- and *č change in members of the mentioned continua, which made it also possible to partially reevaluate genetic clusterization on the basis of this data. Materials and Methods. Apart from the available publications and archival sources on the three areas in question, the analysis is based on the authors’ extensive field work that involves the use of a set of lexical questionnaires compiled in accordance with known aspects of the Turkic linguistic history. The source recordings for every speaker were turned into idiolectal audio-dictionaries and are linked to an electronic etymological database of the Turkic languages, each elicitation analyzed both with the comprehension method and the software for experimental phonetics. Results. As it turns out, this methodology of field work and post-analysis provides information crucial for detailed linguistic clusterization of dialectal continua in particular and any dialectal system in general. Traditionally, subtle problems of divergence and convergence, problems of archaic and innovative phenomena receive their solutions. The results are as follows. Palatal *j- and *č in the languages of the Khakass-Shor-Chulym group have changed by a strict series of rules none of which could be simultaneous, nor could follow each other in a different order. Thus, the two Middle Chulym dialects — Melet and Tutal ones — prove to lack an immediate linguistic ancestor, the Tutal ‘dialect’
is an archaic version of Mrassu Shor, while Melet is closely related to Kyzyl Khakass. Reflexes of *j- and *č are also principal isoglosses for a previously undocumented Khakass dialect, which does not have any specific affinity with Saghai, Kyzyl and Kachin dialects. Areal analysis of Karachay-Balkar shows that dz < proto-Turkic *j- is a secondary development, while, on the other hand, it is finally proven that reflexes *j- > dz~dʑ and *j- > ʑ~z form a more significant isogloss. And for the Tatar-Bashkir dialectal continuum, there were identified three main types of proto-Turkic *j- reflexation; a chronology for these three types intermixing during the early period of the continuum is also proposed.

See the content of the collective monograph 'Clause Architecture in the Parametric Models: Syntax, Information Structure, Word Order' (Anton Zimmerling & Ekaterina Lyutikova, eds.), to be published 2016 in Russian, by the Publishing House LRC 'Languages of Russian Culture'.
The summary is below.

This collective monograph is prepared by a group of Russian linguists sharing the interest to typology, formal models of grammar and interface phenomena. The authors aim at establishing universal and language-specific mechanisms of communicative marking and information ordering. We implement methods of parametric typology and aim at explaining complex multi-layered phenomena in terms of feature combinations which set out both language-internal and cross-linguistic variation. The developed model of the communicative-syntactic interface is defined for an open class of world's languages which apply to word order alternations, shifting in accent markings and morphosyntactic marking as means of encoding information structure.
The focus of our research interest is in the interaction of formal syntax and information structure and on word order systems of scrambling languages which are described in terms of linear-accent transformations, i.e. rules which at once change linear position and communicative status/accent marking of sentence elements. Most authors share the derivational approach to word order systems and work out the hypothesis that some basic word order can be established for scrambling languages too. Within the derivational approach, word order alternations can be explained at the level of narrow syntax, s(yntactic)-structure, cf. Chapters 4, 13 and 15, as well as on the level of c-(ommunicative) structure, cf. Chapters 1, 3 and 7.
Parametrization of language diversity is a dynamic research field in the linguistics of late XX – XXI centuries. In this particular field, adepts of formal and functional frameworks have many shared research issues and the dialogue between different schools in linguistics can be fruitful. These considerations have shaped the methodological component of the present monograph. Syntactic and communicative phenomena of different world's languages are parametrized, which gives a chance to reveal basic principles underlying them and to understand their role in the integral models of the natural language. The book consists of three parts. Chapter 1 “Clause Architecture and Information Structure” (Ekaterina Lyutikova & Anton Zimmerling) sets the general perspective.
Part I is devoted to the interaction of grammatical and communicative mechanisms relevant for the clause architecture. Chapters 2 “Communicative Structure and Linear-Accent Transformations” (Elena Paducheva) and 3 “Linear-Accent Grammar and Thetic Sentences in Russian” (Anton Zimmerling) introduce the notion of linear-accent transformations (LA-transformations) and investigate the potential of LA-grammars for the analysis of Russian and comparable data. Chapter 4 “Low Left Periphery in Hittite: a Formal Analysis” (Andrey Sideltsev) aims at modeling the complex interactions of grammar-internal and communicative aspects of Hittite word order and clause architecture. Chapter 5 “A Multilevel Theory of Clause Combining:  Ossetic and Russian Revisited” (Oleg Belyaev), discusses the strategies of clause combined in Ossetic. Chapter 6 “Verbal Reprise in Irish” (Maria Shkapa) is devoted to one non-trivial communicative operation which becomes possible due to language-specific settings of the clause architecture.
Part II is devoted to issues in clitic studies. Chapter 7 “Clause structure, linear-accent transformations and clitics in Middle  Norwegian” (Anton Zimmerling) sets the issues of clitic ordering in a more general context of clause structure ordering. Chapters 8 “The Syntax of Dative clitics in South Slavic lnaguages” (Galina Petrova & Elena Ivanova) and 9 “Bulgarian clitics” (Elena Ivanova) solve the problems of parametric description of clitics and the interactions of clitic ordering with communicative structure on the basis of several South Slavic languages. Chapter 10 “On Russian endoclitics” (Peter Arkadiev) raises a hypothesis that Russian primary prepositions are endoclitics. Finally, chapter 11 “Impersonal Sentences with an Obligatory Pronominal Experiencer in Bulgarian” (Elena Ivanova) is devoted to a non-trivial interaction of grammar and prosody in Bulgarian, where the presence of clause-level clitics (i.e. a particular type of prosodic structure) is mapped to a particular type of sentence constructions. 
Part III includes chapters devoted to parametric modeling of the basic morphosyntactic mechanisms underlying clause structure — case and agreement. Chapter 12 “Case theory in the Perspective of Case Variation” (Ekaterina Lyutikova & Dilya Ibatullina) discusses mechanisms of case assignment and their parametrization with respect to the case source, agreement and mapping of syntactic and morphological case. The discussion of a non-trivial interaction between subject case marking and predicate agreement is continued in chapter 13 “(Non) agreement of participles and Two Constructions with Non-nominative Subjects in Lithuanian” (Peter Arkadiev). Chapter 14 “The Structural Position of the Direct Object and Information Structure: a view from Pechora dialect of Komi-Zyrian” (Natalia Serdobolskaya & Svetlana Toldova) discusses the interaction of grammatical, referential and communicative factors with the so called differential object marking. Chapter 15 “Syntactic and Semantic Typology of Genitives — the Genitive of Quality as a Locus of Adjectival Features, a View from Russian” (Pavel Graschenkov) is devoted to a non-trivial mapping of syntax and semantic interpretation in constructions with the genetive of quality; this mapping sheds light on their on the special status of this construction in the perspective of word order and branching conditions. Chapter 16 “Person Agreement in the Dargic Languages: an OT and LFG Analysis” (Oleg Belyaev) offers analysis of person agreement mechanisms in terms of two formal frameworks.