In the lead-up to Science Day, celebrated annually in Kazakhstan on April 12, the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan continues its series of publications dedicated to the outstanding achievements of Kazakh scientists.

The next post is dedicated to the research that was awarded the Kül-Tegin Prize for outstanding achievements in Turkology. The prize aims to highlight the historical continuity and enduring interconnectedness of the cultural heritage of the Great Steppe.

In 2025, the Kül-Tegin Prize was awarded for the research paper «Written Variants of the Old Kazakh Language», authored by Mamyrbek Gülfar Mäzhitüzy, PhD in Philology, Associate Professor and Research Fellow at the Akhmet Baitursynov Institute of Linguistics.

In the presented monograph, a new concept (new conclusions) concerning the Old Kazakh written language is proposed for the first time. It is well known that the written language used by Turkic society and later by Kazakh society, referred to by the term “kitabi language” was described negatively during the Soviet period as a “heterogeneous language”, a “mixed language” a “caste language” a “language of religion” a “language contaminated by foreign words and unstable in nature” or an “incomprehensible language in which arabic, persian, tatar, bashkir, and uzbek words are intermixed”. The study provides a separate analysis of the history of the formation of the Old Kazakh written language, the stages of its development, its specific features, and its stylistic branches.

In the subsection “The Concept of the Old Kazakh Written Language” the author emphasizes the necessity of recognizing the Old Kazakh written language – originating from medieval written monuments and continuing through subsequent generations – as a spiritual and cultural phenomenon. Based on the concepts of Turkic language classification proposed by such scholars as A.N. Samoylovich, S.E. Malov, N.A. Baskakov, E. Tenishev, Ä. Quryshzhanov, Ä. Qaidar, R.Syzdyq, and N. Uäli, conclusions concerning the Old Kazakh written language are drawn.

In the subsection “Continuity of the Middle Turkic and Old Kazakh Written Language” the following points are comprehensively examined: the Old Kazakh written language was the first written culture that paved the way for shaping the “Kazakh” character of the classical written tradition of the 10th-14th centuries; it served as the main instrument for establishing political relations when khans and biys resolved major issues of state importance; the Old Kazakh written language produced the earliest examples of the official-administrative style; it met the need for information exchange, which led to the emergence of the earliest epistolary works; and it exerted a significant influence on the further development of “Islamic” literature rooted in the Turkic worldview through the works of Kazakh scholars such as M. Köpeıuly, M. Qaltaıuly, Zh. Shaikhislamuly, and others.

In the subsection “Functional Styles of the Old Kazakh Written Language in the 18th–19th Centuries” it is stated that certain types of functional styles in the Old Kazakh written language developed in parallel with oral literature and contributed to the expansion of the functions of the written language in public life. The study analyzes the forms and structures in which the written language styles scientific, official-administrative, journalistic, and literary-artistic existed within the Old Kazakh written language, and provides textual examples based on specific written monuments.

In the subsection “Internal Branches of the Official Style of the 18th–19th Centuries” it is demonstrated, on the basis of specific written texts, that samples of official and administrative documents although not yet fully standardized in the modern sense had been in use since the 18th century, ranging from simple forms (petitions, applications, etc.) to more complex ones (statutes, decrees, regulations, and the like).

In the second chapter, “Written Variants of the 18th-19th Centuries” the following materials are presented: samples of official-administrative documentation preserved since 1732; epistolary texts preserved since 1839; journalistic materials preserved since 1872; a sample of literary fiction published in 1881; as well as Arabic-script originals and their Cyrillic transcriptions of popular-science works published since 1895.

Relevance of the Study. The work is devoted to the study of the history of the development of the written culture of the Old Kazakh language within the framework of the Turkic written tradition. The monograph covers materials ranging from Arabic-script monuments preserved since 1732 to Old Kazakh written texts published in Cyrillic in 1898. The relevance of the study is reflected in the following aspects:

1. To identify the tradition of the Old Kazakh written language, it is necessary to analyze key written samples based on their original sources. The study determines the dynamics of the functional development of official, epistolary, journalistic, literary, and scientific texts of the 18th–19th centuries. These periods were marked by significant events and transformations in the political, social, and cultural life of the Kazakh people, during which the written language came to be used in diverse contexts.

2. The study also transcribes originals written in Arabic script into Cyrillic, clearly demonstrating the graphic projection of the written language of that period. During transcription, the texts were not adjusted to the norms of the modern literary language; instead, the authentic representation of the written tradition of the respective period was preserved. In any Turkological research, especially in the analysis of written monuments, the original source must be taken into primary consideration. This approach prevents distortion of individual linguistic units, preserves textual integrity, and ensures the reliability of research findings. It is well known that the use of Arabic script encompasses the most important stages in the culture, education, and literature of the Turkic and Kazakh peoples.

3. In the monograph, the functional styles of the Old Kazakh written language are examined not only from a linguistic perspective but also from the standpoint of their social functions, based on specific texts.

4. The monograph defines the trajectory of development of the Old Kazakh written language from written samples preserved since 1732 to popular-science literature of the early 20th century.

Scientific Novelty and Significance. The scientific novelty and significance of the research results lie in the fact that, for the first time, the Old Kazakh written language has been comprehensively investigated in linguistic, structural, and functional aspects; and an accurate graphic projection of Arabic-script originals into Cyrillic has been carried out. This method of transcription provides broad opportunities for comparative study of the usage of Old Kazakh written vocabulary in the modern Kazakh language. On the basis of graphic projection (verbatim transcription), the phonetic, grammatical, and lexical features of Old Kazakh written monuments covering the period from 1732 to the early 20th century are clearly identified, and the process of linguistic evolution is precisely demonstrated.

In the monograph, on the basis of specific conclusions, the meaning of the term “Old Kazakh written language” and its place in the study of language history are elucidated. It is well known that since the second half of the 19th century, when the foundations of the national written language were laid, Kazakh linguistics has established the consideration of the written language in two forms: the first is the national new Kazakh literary written language, and the second is the kitabi language. The kitabi language was used in Kazakh society until the 20th century. During the Soviet period, this term acquired a negative connotation and was characterized as an unsuitable or deficient language. The study conducts analyses and proposes new conclusions regarding the following issues: what this term means and what semantic content it carries; whether, as suggested by some researchers, it was named due to its “publication in print,” and if so, how to interpret works published with a distinctly national character; why the history of Kazakh writing is still viewed through the prism of the kitabi language; what is implied by the concepts of “kitabi language” and “kitabi lexicon”; and what is meant by the Chagatai language, among other related questions.

The importance of the obtained results for science can be highlighted in several aspects.
First, on the basis of the verbatim transcriptions of Arabic-script texts presented in the monograph, their translations into Kazakh have been prepared and included in the text database of the Historical Subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Kazakh Language, developed by the Akhmet Baitursynuly Institute of Linguistics. This makes it possible to elevate the scholarly study of the written heritage of Turkic languages to a new level. The National Corpus represents a systematized collection of all written data (texts) of a particular language. The Historical Subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Kazakh Language brings together various texts and written monuments from different historical periods of the Kazakh language, thereby creating opportunities for their scientific investigation. The inclusion of translations and transcriptions of Arabic-script texts in the National Corpus of the Kazakh Language opens avenues not only for linguistic research but also for the development of historical and cultural studies.

Second, it is known that President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, at the summit of the Organization of Turkic States, proposed the development of a “Road Map” for the study of the common written heritage of the Turkic peoples and the creation of a unified Turkic Digital Library. The texts presented in the monograph may serve as valuable material for such a Digital Library.

Third, future plans include the preparation of a complete translation into Kazakh of the “Regulations Adopted at the Karamola Congress of 1885 with the Participation of Abai Kunanbayev” as well as an analysis of the terminology, individual lexical units, and the text as a whole. The Karamola Congress and its regulations reflect an important stage in the socio-political life of Kazakh society. The terminology and individual lexical items of the text require special attention, as the vocabulary of that period differs from the modern language and incorporates numerous historical and cultural contexts. Therefore, it is essential to gain a profound understanding of the meaning of each word, term, and sentence, and to clarify their usage in that historical period. The text should be analyzed not only from a linguistic perspective but also from ideological, social, and philosophical viewpoints.

Fourth, the graphic projection carried out directly from the original source (verbatim transcription into Cyrillic) contributes significantly to linguotextological research. An accurate rendering of the original text in Cyrillic makes it possible to present faithfully not only the writing system of the language but also the structure of the script itself. This plays an important role in the study of historical written monuments, as it allows for the most precise reflection of the phonetic and semantic aspects of each word or sentence. The accuracy of graphic projection is of crucial importance in linguistic research, since it enables a clear identification of the position, usage, and semantic load of each linguistic element in the original text.

Fifth, on the basis of the collected texts (from 1732 to the early 20th century), it becomes possible to conduct comparative studies of the etymological and semantic features of ancient Kazakh words and borrowed arabic-persian vocabulary in comparison with the modern language, as well as to trace their semantic evolution.

Sixth, the texts presented in the monograph can be used in the compilation of dictionaries of historical and etymological orientation.

At present, strengthening cooperation and ties among Turkic-speaking states is one of the most important priorities. It is well known that President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev stated at the 8th summit: “The entire Turkic world is united by common historical roots and shared interests” In this context, the study of written heritage contributes to the identification of common features of Turkic languages and thereby deepens scholarly and cultural ties among Turkic peoples. The texts of the monograph provide opportunities for researchers of old uzbek, old kyrgyz, old azerbaijani, and other languages to conduct comparative analyses.

By comparing the written monuments of the 18th-19th centuries preserved among Turkic peoples with the texts presented in the monograph in linguistic, structural, stylistic, semantic, and other aspects it becomes possible to identify Turkic identity and similarities in the written language, as well as to collect shared linguistic usages and terminology characteristic of the written heritage of Turkic peoples. For example, through phonetic, grammatical, lexical, and stylistic similarities manifested in historical written samples of the 18th-19th centuries after the formation of Turkic peoples as nations, it is possible to determine the linguistic unity of Turkic-speaking peoples and to create an electronic database of common vocabulary. This may serve as evidence for the existence of a shared terminological fund in Turkic languages and for the fact that identity and culture have been preserved through language. The similarity of the written heritage of Turkic peoples after their formation as nations testifies to the commonality of their linguistic and cultural foundations. Turkic identity thus represents not only interconnectedness but also shared features and mutual influences in the languages, literature, culture, and art of Turkic peoples.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the direct study and analysis of historical written materials based on original sources constitute a pressing issue in contemporary Turkology. It cannot be denied that, in many cases, research in the field of Turkology is conducted not on the basis of originals but on transcriptions or translations. This may negatively affect the scientific accuracy and reliability of research results. For example, during the translation or transcription of written monuments, there is a risk of inaccurate transmission of cultural and linguistic codes. Therefore, when transcription is used in research, it is essential that the original source be examined alongside it.

Working with original texts is also valuable for scholars in cultural studies, history, and literary studies, as written texts preserve not only the structure of the language but also the social, political, and cultural life of the period, as well as the worldview of the people. The original sources and verbatim transcriptions presented in the monograph will thus be useful to researchers across various academic disciplines.

Data on major scientific publications (monographs, chapters in monographs, articles, reviews, and protection documents) published as a result of the work over the past five years:

1. Ескі қазақ тілінің жазба нұсқалары, Асыл ЖК. – 2024. – 360 б.

2. Ойконимия Восточного Казахстана (Алтайский, Глубоковский и Катон-Карагайский районы)// Вопросы ономастики, - 2024.- DOI 10.15826/vopr_onom.2024.21.2.020

3. Semantic Analysis of the Linguistic Heritage of the Golden Horde Period: Based on the Material of “Gulistan Bit-Turki” by Seif Sarai and “Khosrov and Shirin” by Qutb//Forum for Linguistic Studies, - 2024 .- DOI 10.30564/fls.v6i5.7175

4. «Хұсрау уа Шырын» мәтінін транскрипциялау мәселесі//Вестник Евразийского национального университета имени Л.Н. Гумилева. Серия Филология, - 2023.- DOI 10.32523/2616-678X-2023-145-4-55-65

5. Араб, парсы тілдерінен енген атаулардың индикаторлық әлеуеті// TILTANYM, - 2025.- DOI 10.55491/2411-6076-2025-3-12-23

News

SCIENCE MARATHON FOR APRIL 12: Introducing the 2025 Laureates of the Named Prizes