Yakut

Continuing on previous research, in this fifth part of a paper series, a total of fifteen newly found suggested borrowings from the Turkic, Tungusic and Mongolic languages into the Yukaghir languages and dialects of far northeastern Siberia are presented as loanword etymologies, as well as eleven most tentative borrowing suggestions from the same sources, tentative only due to numerous semantic or phonological problems. The chronology of the totally twenty-six borrowing suggested is considered again to some degree, and solid phonological and semantic considerations are given for each suggestion, and other possible cognates or borrowings in the surrounding languages are also discussed. The results continue to highlight the extensive historical social contacts between the Yukaghir populations and surrounding tribes.

[DRAFT PAPER VERSION - the numbering of the drafts for this paper series require some clarification. This fifth draft is what became the second part of the fourth installment of the paper series, while the original fourth draft became the first part of teh fourth installment. Thus, the published fourth installment is a double paper; a reader of the published fourth installment will thus read the results of both the original fourth and fifth draft papers. The fifth installment will thus essentially be a sixth draft paper, but it will be called part V instead.]

This paper presents twenty-five newly found suggested borrowings from the Turkic, Tungusic and Mongolic languages into the Yukaghiric languages of far northeastern Siberia. The chronology of the borrowings is considered, and solid phonological and semantic considerations are given for each suggestion. Several of the new borrowings are quite recent and the majority relate to technological terms, social life and elementary actions. This would speak for a situation in far northeastern Siberia of intimate tribal contacts where multilingualism was the norm historically, hunting techniques were shared and inter-tribal marriages were commonplace. Additionally, two prospective borrowings related to reindeer terminology are discussed. Furthermore, borrowings from Yukaghiric into other languages, barely discussed in scientific literature, are also analyzed and commented upon briefly.

Lehçelerde şeklen aynı olan kelimelerin anlamca farklı olması şeklinde izah edilen “yalancı eşdeğerlik”  metin aktarmalarındaki temel sorunların başında gelmektedir. Bu terim araştırmacılarca “sahte karşılıklar”, “sözde denkteşler”, “tam yalancı eş değer kelimeler” ve “aldatıcı kelimeler” gibi isimlerle de karşılanmıştır. Türkiye Türkçesine en uzak lehçelerden biri olan ve bünyesinde Ana Türkçeye ait birçok özellikler bulunduran Saha Türkçesi ile Türkiye Türkçesi arasındaki yalancı eşdeğerliğin tespitinin, bu lehçe arası yapılacak olan metin çevirilerinde meydana gelebilecek sorunların giderilmesinde faydalı olacağı düşünülmektedir. Bu bağlamda ele alınan çalışmanın bu alandaki boşluğu kısmen de olsa dolduracağı umulmaktadır.

Mitoloji kavramı denildiğinde zaman öncelikle Yunan ve Mısır mitolojisi aklımıza gelmektedir. Fakat bu durum her ne kadarda yoğunlukta olsa da Türk mitolojisinin etkisinin de fazlaca olduğunu görmek mümkündür. Yunan ve Mısır mitolojilerinde denk geldiğimiz kanatlı atlar, yeraltı yaratıkları, çift başlı canavarlar, su yaratıkları gibi mitlerin çoğunu Türk mitolojisinde görmekteyiz. Bu canlıların milletlerin efsane ve mitlerinde hemen hemen aynı özelliklere sahip oldukları muhakkaktır. Toplumsal etkileşimler neticesinde milletlerin efsane ve destanlarına giren bu canlılara aynı özellik fakat farklı isimlerle rastlamak mümkündür.
Eski Türk toplumlarında Şamanizm’in mitolojiye etkisi fazlasıyla görülmektedir. Şamanlar ritüellerinde mitolojik yaratık ve hayvanları bir ongun olarak kullanmakla birlikte bu yaratıkları tanrılarına ulaşmak maksadı ile de seçmişlerdir. Yeryüzünde ve yer altında yaşayan bu canlıların kimisine insanların en büyük yardımcısı ve kurtarıcı olarak rastlarken, kimisine kötülük saçan, insanlara zarar veren canlılar olarak rastlamamız mümkündür.
Türk mitolojisine göre dünya üç bölümden oluşmaktadır. Bunlar gök, yer ve yer altı şeklindedir. Burada yaşayan varlıklar her açıdan birbirinden farklı olarak yaratılmış ve farklı bir şekilde yaşamlarını sürdürmektedirler. Gökte yaşayan varlıklar genellikle kutsal kabul edilen tanrıya daha yakın kanatlı varlıklardır. Yeryüzünde ise hayvanlar, insanlar ve bitkiler yaşamlarını idame ettirmekteydiler. Son olarak da yer altında sürüngenler diğer bir mana ile kötülük yaşamaktaydı.

Saha Türkçesi, Ana Türkçeden erken dönemde ayrılan lehçelerden biridir. Bünyesinde eski Türkçeye has çeşitli özellikler bulundurmaktadır. Bunun yanı sıra Saha Türkçesi, çeşitli araştırmacılar tarafından Oğuzca olduğu belirtilen unsurları da içerisinde barındırmaktadır. Saha Türkçesi ile Oğuz grubu lehçeleri arasında bugün ciddi bir mesafe farkı vardır. Bu mesafe geçmişte de -bugünkü kadar olmasa bile- pek farklı değildi. Bu durum karşılıklı münasebetleri kısıtladığı gibi her iki grup arasındaki dil ilişkilerini zora sokmaktadır. Buradan hareketle, Saha Türkçesinde tespit edilen Oğuzca unsurların, Eski Türkçeden Saha Türkçesine yadigâr olduğunu düşünülmektedir. Bu çalışmada, daha önceki araştırmalarda Oğuzca olarak belirtilen unsurların Saha Türkçesindeki durumu tespit edilmeye çalışıldı. Daha önceki çalışmalarda Oğuzca olarak belirtilen “gece, bulmak, yoğurt, û, ürün, el, kizlee-, de-, yağ, inek” kelimelerinin Saha Türkçesi söz varlığındaki karşılıkları, diğer Türk lehçelerindeki karşılıkları ile birlikte verilmiştir. Bu kelimelerin haricinde, Ahmet B. Ercilasun ve Ziyat Akkoyunlu’nun Kâşgarlı Mahmud Dîvânu Lugâti’t-Türk, Robert Dankoff ve James Kelly’in Compendium of The TurkicDialects, (Dīwān Luγāt at-Turk) ve Akartürk Karahan’ın Dīvānu Luġāti’t-Türk’e Göre XI. Yüzyıl Türk Lehçe Bilgisi isimli eserde, Dîvânu Luġâti’t-Türk’te tespit edilen yaklaşık 350 Oğuzca kelimenin Saha Türkçesinde yer alıp almadığı Saha Türkçesine ait Edouard Pekarskiy’in Yakut Dili Sözlüğü, P. A. Sleptsov’un Yakutsko - Russkiy Slovar ve Sahaca - Sahaca olarak hazırlanmış ve /s/ sesine kadar 8 cildi yayınlanmış olan Saxa Tılın Bıhaarıılaax Ulaxan Tılcıta isimli sözlükleri taranarak tespit edilmeye çalışıldı. Çalışmada söz varlığı incelemelerinin yanı sıra ses ve şekil bilgisi unsurları da incelendi. Bu kısımda asli uzun ünlülerin, t- > d- ve ḳ- > ġ- // k- > g- seslerinin durumu ve duyulan geçmiş zaman eki -mIş (> Saha Türkçesi -BIt)’ın Saha Türkçesindeki durumları ele alındı. Çalışmanın sonuç bölümünde ise Saha Türkçesindeki Oğuzca olan ve olmayan unsurlara göre genel bir değerlendirme yapıldı.

Verbs are one of the word groups in Turkish; and, what we call as sentence, which is a complete statement expressing an aim, can only be formed with verbs or the words used instead of verbs. In this regard, the role of verbs in language is very significant. Verbs are categorized into three groups in accordance with their structures, as being simple verbs, derived verbs, and conjunctive verbs. Simple verbs do not originate from any other word and not conjugate to any words: söyle- (tell), gül- (laugh), yaz- (write), çalış- (work), etc. Derived verbs are derived from the base or body of a word: ses-le- (call-ing), düz-el- (correct-ing), hay-kır (shout-ing), kes-il (being cut), süs-len- (garnish-ing), tanı-ş- (meet-ing) etc. Conjunctive verbs consist of more than one word. Conjunctive verbs are created either with the conjugation of a noun and auxiliary verb or with the conjugation of a verb and auxiliary verb. In this study, mainly conjunctive verbs created in Sakha language with the conjugation of a noun and auxiliary verb will be identified. With this aim, besides various grammar sources and other sources, Edouard Pekarskiy’s Yakut Dili Sözlüğü (Yakut Language Dictionary), P. A. Sleptsov’s Yakutsko - Russkiy Slovar, and Sakha-Sakha dictionary Saxa Tılın Bıhaarıılaax Ulaxan Tılcıta will be scanned. In the end of the study, the frequency of occurrence of the auxiliary verbs used in the creation of conjunctive verbs will be identified through the presented materials.
Keywords: Sakha language, conjunctive verb, noun, verb, auxiliary verb.

This paper presents further borrowings mostly related to reindeer economy in the far north-eastern Siberian area between several non-genetically affiliated languages. The semantics, phonology and chronology are discussed. The following are etymologized as Ewenki borrowings: Yukaghiric moll’e ‘small wild reindeer’, ongul ‘reindeer’, šaqala ‘fox’, ugur ‘spine’ and joγul ‘nose’, and Pre-Yakut borrowings: Yukaghiric saa-laaghare ’south, lit. tree left’, saaghare ‘left side of a yurt; West’, šajghEr ‘aside’. A possible Turkic borrowing is found with (Proto-)Turkic *qan ‘blood’ > Proto-Samoyed *ke
m ‘blood’. Lastly, Uralic cognates or borrowings in Yukaghiric consist of kedie- ‘obstinate (of a tied reindeer)’, petcigije ‘reins’, a:cE ‘domestic reindeer’ and sierdiid-ile ‘reindeer not selected for slaughter’.

This paper presents twelve newly found suggested borrowings from (Pre-)Yakut, a Turkic language previously known to be a considerable source of borrowings, into the Yukaghiric languages of far northeastern Siberia. All suggestions are given both with solid phonological and semantic considerations, and the chronology of the borrowings is considered.
Several of the new borrowings are quite recent and relate to hunting and wandering and surprisingly many are semantically connected to elementary phenomena, actions and perceptions, while a few others clearly find their etymological origins as borrowed from the tales of the surrounding tribes.

"The following sentence in the eighth line of the Tuñuquq inscription has been read and translated by different scholars in various ways: Y(a)g(ï)m(ï)z t(ä)grä wçwk t(ä)g (ä)rti biz □g² (ä)rt(i)m(i)z. The difficulty and variety in the reading and the interpretation of the sentence arise from two words occurring in the sentence, namely wçwk and □g². In the present study, new readings, meanings and etymologies for these two words will be presented.
The first word wčwk is derived from the noun ōč “the depletion (of a thing)” which occurs in Dīwān Luγāt at-Türk. Until now it has been mistakenly read ūč. The Yakut (Sakha) verb uohun- (< *ōčun-) “to diminish” which is derived from ōč reveals that the vowel must have been /ō/. The verb *ōču- derived from the noun *ōč must have meant “to diminish, to be depleted”. The adjective očuk as attested in the Tuñuquq inscription is derived from *ōču- and means “diminished, depleted”.
The reading of the second word bears an epigraphic diffulty due to the square-shaped letter. It has been concluded that this letter which occurs only once in the word □g² in the Orkhon inscriptions has the sound value /š/ in the Yenissei inscriptions. If it has the same sound value in the Tuñuquq inscription all possible readings of the word □g² can be formulated as (ä/e)š(ä/i)g. A cognate of the base of this lexeme, namely of äšäg as we read it, can be found in the verb išey- “to increase” and the adjective išlĕ “abundant, plentiful” in Tatar and Bashkir. The base *iš “abundant, plentiful” regularly goes back to *äš. The adjective äšäg derived from *äš is retained in the Yakut adjective ihegey “abundant, rich”. Considering the correspondence of Mongolic /lb/ and Turkic /š/, Mongolic elbeg “abundance; abundant, plentiful, rich” may be
the cognate of Turkic äšäg. Yakut elbē- which is apparently borrowed from Mongolic shows that elbeg is derived from the verbal base elbe-. It is, however, not preserved in Mongolic. Mongolic *elbe- is a cognate of Turkic äšä-.
Considering the fact that in the Old Turkic runiform inscriptions some letters with the sound value /s/ are used to denote /š/, the next possible sound value of the square-shaped letter in the Tuñuquq inscription is /s/. In this case, □g² may be read as (ä)s(i)g. This word might be identical with äsig attested in Dīwān Luγāt at-Türk and mistakenly read äsik. The adjective äsig
derived from äs- “to stretch” with the formative -(X)g means “vast” in Dīwān Luγāt at-Türk. It probably means “spread” in the Tunyukuk inscription since it qualifies human beings.
In the conclusion, it is shown that that the sentence in the eighth line of the Tunyukuk inscription must be read and translated as follows: Y(a)g(ï)m(ï)z t(ä)grä oçuk t(ä)g (ä)rti biz (ä)š(ä)g / (ä)s(i)g (ä)rt(i)m(i)z “The enemies around (us) were as if they were diminished [but] we were increased in number / spread”."

ÖZ: Saha Türkçesinde fiillerin zaman ve kip eklerinin olumsuz çekimlerinde kullanılan olumsuzluk ekleri, diğer Türk lehçelerine göre çeşitlilik arz etmektedir. Bu durum, hâlihazırda ek varyantlaşmasıyla oldukça zengin bir ek sistemine sahip olan Saha Türkçesini öğrenmeyi ve bu alanda çalışanların işini zora sokmaktadır. Gelecek zaman ve olumluluk kipinin çekiminde kullanılan olumsuzluk ekinin şahıslara göre farklılık göstermesi yapının ne kadar karmaşık olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Saha Türkçesinde fiillerin olumsuz formu 7 şekilde yapılmaktadır: 1.-BA: görülen geçmiş zaman, şart kipinin I. tipinde; 2.-BAtAx: duyulan geçmiş zaman, kesin geçmiş zaman, ara sıra olan geçmiş zamanın I. tipi, şart kipinin II. tipi ile tahmin kipinde; 3.-BAt: şimdiki (geniş) zaman, şimdiki zaman gereklilik ve istek kipi III. tipinde; 4.-(I)mInA;-BAkkA: yakın geçmiş zaman, ara sıra olan geçmiş zamanın II. tipinde; 5. suox (yok, değil): ara sıra olan geçmiş zamanın III. tipi, gelecek zaman, gelecek zaman gerekliliğin I. tipi, gelecek zaman gereklilik II. tipi, olumluluk kipi I. tipi, alışılmışlık kipinin I. ve II. tipi ile istek kipi I. ve II. tipinde; 6.-(I)mA: gelecek zaman, gelecek zaman gerekliliğinin I. ve II tipi, yakın gelecek zaman emir kipi, uzak gelecek zaman emir kipinin I. tipinin I. ve II. türü ile II. tipinin I. ve II. türü, korku/endişe kipi, olumluluk kipinin I. ve II. tipinde; 7. ilik: olumsuzluk kipinde kullanılmaktadır. Adından da anlaşılacağı üzere olumsuz bir anlam ifade eder ve tek çekimi vardır. Bu çekimde de ilik "henüz, henüz yok, daha yok" kelimesi vasıtasıyla yapılmaktadır. Bunların haricinde, yakın gelecek zaman emir kipinin olumsuz çekiminde, teklik ve çokluk I. ve II. şahıs çekimlerinde-(I)mA olumsuzluk ekinin; teklik ve çokluk III. şahıs çekimlerinde ise-BA olumsuzluk ekinin kullanılması bakımından, diğer zaman ve kip çekimlerinden ayrı bir özellik göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada yukarıdaki olumsuzluk ekleri, yapı ve fonksiyonları bakımından örneklerle birlikte değerlendirilecektir.

This paper evaluates and expands upon previously suggested sound rules governing the phonological outcome of early root-initial proto-sibilants (*s- and *ś-) and proto-affricates (*š-, *ć- and *č-) in Late Proto-Yukaghir (PY), as shown by cognate correspondences in Proto-Uralic (PU) and by Tungusic and Turkic borrowings. The proto-sibilant *s- underwent deletion (*Ø-), retention (*s-) or lateralization (*l-); *ś- was retained unchanged and earlier *š- had changed into *č- in PY. Universally, PY proto-sibilants and proto-affricates find regular lexical correspondences in PU as described by a set of non-trivial phonological rules: Pre-PY *sVr/k/γ- > PY *lVr/k/γ-: a regular lateralization of the sibilant in Yukaghiric occurred with back vowels and *-r-, *-k- and possibly *-γ-, but not *-q-, through an intermediary hypothetical *θ- stage. Pre-PY *sVl/ŋ- > PY *ØVl/ŋ-: a sibilant deletion rule occurred with any vowel and *-l- or *- ŋ-. However, all structures of the intermediate type Pre-PY *sV1ŋ/l/m/n-k/q-V2-, where V1 is a back vowel, pose an exception wherein sibilant deletion was blocked, and the sibilant was either retained or changed into a lateral. Sibilant deletion still occurred in these cases if V1 was a front vowel. Pre-PY *ś- > PY *ś- > KY š- & TY s-: the Yukaghir lexicon in these cases likely developed through intermediate *š’-/*θ’- from Old Yukaghir. Furthermore, Pre-PY *š- > PY *č- regularly. All of these sound changes are controlled by phonology and affect borrowings as well as inherited vocabulary from before PY, but do not affect post-PY borrowings. The sibilant-deletion rule is clearly an influence from extensive language contacts with Yakut-speakers, and certain roots show that the Yukaghir rules of synharmonism were already in effect prior to sibilant deletion. In addition, the results are concurrent with several older cognate suggestions between Uralic and Yukaghiric and further add to this corpus. Identifying these historical processes also strengthens the evidence that the Yukaghir languages are genetically related to the Uralic language family.

Continuing on previous research, in this second part of a paper series, eleven newly found suggested borrowings from the Turkic, Tungusic and Mongolic languages into the Yukaghir languages and dialects of far northeastern Siberia are presented as loanword etymologies. The chronology of the borrowings is considered, and solid phonological and semantic considerations are given for each suggestion, and other possible cognates or borrowings in the surrounding languages are also discussed.

[DRAFT PAPER VERSION]

П и с ь м е н н и к. Л i т е р а т у р а. Ж и т т я 36 05 Олесь КУЛЬЧИНСЬКИЙ, лауреат премії «Ars Translationis» ім. Миколи Лукаша журналу «Всесвіт» ВАСИЛЬ ДУБРОВСЬКИЙ (1897-1966): ПОСМЕРТНИЙ СХОВОК НА ТУРЕЦЬКИХ АРКУШАХ Український орієнталізм десятками років перебував у зародку. Годі згадувати про тортури, завдані сталінським режимом Агатангелові Кримському та цілій плеяді на-уковців, сформованих довкола його постаті. Нинішня ж провінційність вітчизняного сходознавства породжена тією ж нехіттю імперського центру завважувати бодай найменші прояви конкуренції московським сходознавчим школам. Давнішнє опертя Москви на Азію не терпить, щоби хтось зазирав у його сутність, а тим паче-міц-нив власні взаємини з народами та етносами, котрі потрапили в її обійми. Проте радянські репресії сповна вразили не всіх. Василь Дубровський, виходець із Чернігівщини, член Всеукраїнської наукової асоціації сходознавства, що діяла впродовж 1926-1932 років, повернувся зі свого ув'язнення до України живим. Свій термін він відбув у Забайкаллі протягом 1934-1939 років. На щастя, й вир Другої світової війни дарував йому нагоду вціліти. Будучи професором Харківського університету за перших років війни, він ще до її завершення емігрував за кордон. 1956 року Дубровський перебирається з Німеччини до США. Тут він і далі пра-цює в академічній сфері; стає членом редколегії часопису «Український історик» та до останку мешкає в Річмонді, де й похований. Лаконічна біографія… а втім, нітрохи не нівелює наукових здобутків історика. Вони ж украй особливі та незнайомі широкому загалу українських гуманітаріїв. Передовсім у царині орієнталізму Дубровський зосередив свою увагу на турецько-та кримськотатарсько-українських взаєминах. Хоча не оминає він і заморської літератури, навіть тлумачить українською мовою й публікує твори турецьких авторів Якуба Кадрі та Омера Сейфеддіна. Проте чимало праць історика не дійшли донині, за-гинувши за совіцької доби. Деякі-й досі зберігаються серед рукописів. 2011 року значна частина наукових публікацій Василя Дубровського нарешті повернулася до українського чита-ча окремим виданням. Варто відзначити ту працю, яку здійснив її укладач-сходознавець Юрій Кочубей, зібравши статті свого попередника. Щоправда, видавцеві не вда-лося оминути ґанджу: книжка побачила світ не під іме-нем автора, що став жертвою тоталітарної радянської системи, а-її укладача. У цьому ж збірнику перевидані й наукові матеріали Василя Дубровського турецькою мовою. Упродовж 1950-1960-х років він публікував їх у часопису «Dergi» (тур. часо-пис), що друкувався в Мюнхені. Доля цих публікацій-геть детективна. Адже їхніх українських аналогів не існує. Від-так у 2000-х роках ці вісім статей Дуб ровського-майже Агатангел Кримський

My draft notes for the Environmental Audit Committee's oral discussions on 5th April 2017 at the Houses of Parliament without references given here. The oral session draft was published on 28th April 2017 with the final text still in reviews to include important additional items omitted on the draft text. The full text will have soon all the necessary references. Due to this text being a draft the text and images appear unaligned with the text due to it being draft for the session on 5th April. However, the Parliament decided nevertheless to publish this semi-complete version. More up-to-date text (.docx format) is on Drafts section. It has been receiving reviews and I will publish the final text separately once all the external input has been duly received and processed.

The Barguzin County of the 19th century was a territory to the northeast of Lake Baikal. From the viewpoint of ethnic history it was a specific historical-ethnographic area. In the raiddle ages this region’s territory witnessed active contacts of Turks, Mongols and Tungus people resulting in the foirnation of various ethnic substrata, such as Buryat-Mongolian clans in the Tungus and Yakut tribes and vice versa. In the 19th century population coraposition of the Barguzin County got significantly шоге diverse due to the arrival of newcoraers, raostly Russian and Jewish exiled convicts, who added up to the indigenous Buryat and Tungus population. The foirnation of one of the largest Jewish diasporas in Siberia, collectively known as Barguzin Jews, Ьесаше a characteristic feature of this region. The Russians foirned a special ethno-local group of“Barguzin Russian hunters”.
Баргузинский округ в XIX в. - это территория, находящаяся к северо-востоку от оз. Байкал, представляющая с позиций этнической истории особую историко-этнографи¬ческую область. В средневековье была зоной интенсивных контактов тюрков, монголов и тунгусов, благодаря которым в регионе активно протекали этноконсолидационные эт¬нические процессы, результатом которых стало сложение различных этнических под¬разделений, например, бурят-монгольских родовых единиц в составе тунгусских, якут¬ских племен - и наоборот. В XIX в. состав населения Баргузинского округа значительно усложняется: к коренному населению - бурятам и тунгусам прибавляется значитель¬ный пласт новоприбывших, основу которого составили поселенцы-каторжане, преиму¬щественно русские и евреи. Характерной особенностью региона стало формирование одной из крупнейших еврейских диаспор в Сибири, за которой закрепилось название «баргузинские евреи». Русские образовали особую этнолокальную группу «баргузинских русских промысловиков».

Continuing on previous research, in this third part of a paper series, eighteen newly found suggested borrowings from the Turkic, Tungusic and Mongolic (and Russian) languages into the Yukaghir languages and dialects of far northeastern Siberia are presented as loanword etymologies, which is followed by the discussion of a few tentative cases. The chronology of the borrowings is considered, and solid phonological and semantic considerations are given for each suggestion, and other possible cognates or borrowings in the surrounding languages are also discussed. Further, some transcriptional corrections to the documentation of older Yukaghir lexicon is suggested. The results again highlight the extensive historical social contacts between the Yukaghir populations and surrounding tribes.

[DRAFT PAPER VERSION]

Wie die Existenz der persischen, so erschien auch die der arabischen Lehnwörter im Jakutischen zuerst wegen der geographischen Entfernung dieser Völker ausgeschlossen. Das große jakutische Wörterbuch von E. Piekarski ermöglichte jedoch einen tieferen Einblick in den jakutischen Wortschatz und seit
dieser Zeit begegnen uns in der turkologischen Literatur verstreute Hinweise auf die persische bzw. arabische Herkunft des einen oder anderen Wortes. Diese zu sammeln und zu sichten, schien eine dankbare Aufgabe zu sein.

Özet
Sahalar zengin bir halk edebiyatına sahiptir.  Bilmeceler de Saha edebiyatında önemli bir yer teşkil eder ve halk arasında yaygın bir kullanıma sahiptir.  Türkiye’de Saha bilmeceleri üzerine müstakil bir çalışma yapılmamıştır.  Bu çalışmamızda daha önce Türkiye’de yayınlanmış Saha bilmecelerle birlikte ilk defa tarafımızdan Saha Türkçesinden Türkiye Türkçesine aktarılan bilmeceler konuları bakımından sınıflandırılmıştır. Ayrıca bilmeceler şekil ve içerikleri bakımından değerlendirilmiştir.
Abstract
The Sakhas have a rich folk literature. The Riddles also have an important place in Sakha literature and widespread use among the people. There has not been a specific study on Sakha riddles in Turkey before. Along with those previously published in Turkey, the riddles, classified according to topics, have been transferred to Turkish in Turkey from Sakha Turkish for the first time by us. Riddles are evaluated in terms of form and content.

Morphological categories of Siberian Turkic numerals are particularly complex and therefore deemed to be especially advantageous to areal investigations. The aim of this paper is to see whether (at least some of) the suffixes of collective numerals can readily be used as isogloss connecting Yakut and Dolgan with Tuvinian and Tofalar or, maybe, also some other Turkic languages.

In the Middle Ages, ethnic processes occur on the territory of the Baikal region, which gave irapetus to the formation of Buryats and Yakuts. Among the Yakut legends there is a mention of one of the ancestors of the Yakuts - Omogoi Baai, as a Buryat from the Angara river. In this article, parallels are drawn between the Yakut eponym Omogoi and Buryat eponym Obogon. The ethnic composition of the tribal group of Obogoni olon, which was ancestral for the Yakuts, descendants of Omogoy is determined.

Abstract: The comitative case is no standard case in modern Turkic morphology. In this paper, the main syntactic functions of the comitative in Yakut and Dolgan are established and, besides, its meaning in suffix compositions (Comit. + Acc.; Comit. + Dat.; Comit. + Abl. and Com. + Instr.) is analyzed. As to the origin of both phonetic variants of the comitative suffix, -lyyn is genetically Turkic, whereas -naan seems to have developed from an Evenki suffix changed due to the analogical influence of Turkic -lyyn.