Talk:Crimean Tatar language

Untitled

These statements are not true!

In 1992/93 Crimean Tatar was made the third official language of the peninsula, as by then its speakers made up 10% of the population.

Since 2002 the Crimean Tatars have been writing with a new Turkish alphabet, that was jointly developed from Turkish and Crimean Tatar students at the University of Istanbul for the Crimean Tatar language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.175.197.58 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 3 December 2004 (UTC)

Fix it then. I know absolutely nothing about any Tartar languages. Laura Scudder 19:18, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Official Language

The infobox says it's the official language of Crimea. But the article Crimea says it is not. --Menchi 08:07, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Corrected 195.175.37.70 01:23, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Link with Ottoman Turkish

This article states first: Yalıboylus who lived on the southern coast of Crimea before 1944 speak an Oghuz dialect very close to Turkish and then In 1876 different Turkish Crimean dialects were made into a uniform written language by İsmail Gaspıralı. A preference was given to the Oghuz dialect of Yalıboylus in order to break the link between the Crimeans and the Turks of the Ottoman Empire. If the Yalıboylus dialect is 'very close' (i.e. the closest) to Turkish, how could the choice for this dialect break the link with Ottoman Turkish? Either the former is not true, or the latter. Fransvannes 11:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

İQTElif

The article İQTElif seems like original research. I tried contacting its main editor, User:Ultranet, but he didn't reply.

I'm thinking of proposing it for deletion, because i couldn't find any actual use for this orthography - most supporters of Latin Tatar seem to use Zamanalif (please, correct me if i'm wrong!). However that article does seem to have some useful linguistic information. Can anyone extract the useful information from it? I am not an expert in Turkic languages.

Thanks. --Amir E. Aharoni 07:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Crimean Tatar in Finland???

I don't think so. The Finnish Tatar community are Kazan Tatars, speaking the Mishär dialect. 195.16.202.19 10:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

You are wrong. The great majority of the Tatars in Finland are Mishars and not Qazan Tatars.Spring01 (talk) 20:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Is there an "official" script?

Is there an "official" script for Crimean Tatar?

On the internet i mostly see Latin script on Crimean Tatar websites. But i also saw signs on government buildings in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea are in three languages - Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar, and they were all Cyrillic. So that is a bit of "official" recognition.

And then there's that all-Ukrainian law that says that no language is official except Ukrainian.

Can anyone please clarify the situation? --Amir E. Aharoni 16:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Crimean Tatar Qurultay (a kind of an ethnic parliament) adopted new Latin script in 1991, then it was officialy adopted by the Supreme Council (Verkhovna Rada) of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in 1997. So de jure Latin script can be considrered official. But in practice (due to the lack of the governmental support) Cyrillic script is still used much more wider. Approximately 80% of books in Crimean Tatar and both major Crimean Tatar newspapers are published in Cyrillic, children in secondary schools are also taught in Cyrillic. So, officially new alfabet was adopted, but no real measures were taken to realize the change of the script in practice. BTW, Crimean Tatar language today has no official status and no official regulation body. So, it is not clear, who has now right to determine what is official, and what is not. Don Alessandro 08:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Can you put this information into the article with sources? --Amir E. Aharoni 11:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Crimean "Turkish"?

Uhmm... Since Turkish is usually defined as "something that is of the country of Turkey", I highly doubt that saying "Crimean Turkish" is a correct way to refer to this language.

Crimean Tatar or Crimean should be the only ones used imo... People who hear Crimean Turkish will think they are immigrants from Turkey or something. Well, thats what my friend thought anyways when he saw the "Crimean Turkish" part. They are, a whole different race. And I'm sure not all of them are citizens of Turkey ;)

128.172.215.5 (talk) 03:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

"Crimean Turkish" is one of the names by which this language is known. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it not a fact. (Taivo (talk) 06:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC))

I'm not saying it's not a fact... simply pointing out that it is misleading. Is that an official name used by linguists though? It feels like undermining these people's sovereignty, kinda like saying "Ukrainian Russian" for the Ukrainian language. Just my opinion, I'm not a linguist or anything... 128.172.215.5 (talk) 01:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, therefore we list the names by which a language is known. Indeed, one of the two ISO 639-3 names for this language is Crimean Turkish, so, yes, it is official and is used by linguists to refer to this language. It is not Wikipedia's place to stroke a people's ego, its place is to report the facts. And the fact is that the semi-official (ISO 639-3) name of this language is Crimean Turkish as an alternate to Crimean Tatar. No one calls Ukrainian "Russian". It's a false analogy. Sovereignty over the Crimean community vests in Ukraine, not in Turkey, so the whole issue of "Turkish" is moot anyway. (Taivo (talk) 02:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC))

From what I understand, the distinction is much more complex. The southern dialects are often referred to as Crimean Turkish because they are derived from the Turkish spoken in the Crimea during Ottoman rule. The northern dialects are referred to as Crimean Tatar, as they are Kipchak, rather than Oguz based. The literary language, however, is based on the mixture of Kipchak and Oghuz-based varieties. Historically, there were two languages, but presently (especially due to numerous displacements and a renewed sense of unified identity) there is essentially one, with dialects manifesting certain Oghuz and Kipchak features. It would be nice if someone could find some appropriate references and clarify all of this in the article.Straughn (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

In earlier linguistic classifications, there were, indeed, two different languages listed--Crimean Tatar and Crimean Turkish. More recent works, however, have combined these two into a single language labelled "Crimean Tatar, Crimean Turkish". I wasn't aware of the dialect distinction before, but Oghuz influence is predominantly lexical and the southern dialect is still fundamentally Kipchak with Oghuz influences. All the good sources I'm aware of are in other languages--Russian and German. In Johanson and Csato, Crimean Tatar is only extensively discussed in the chapter on West Kipchak with a passing note on Oghuz, Karaim, and Nogai influences on it in Crimea. In its outdated classification of Turkic languages, however, Ethnologue places Crimean Turkish in Southern Turkic rather than with the other Kipchak languages in the Ponto-Caspian branch of Western Turkic. That placement is undoubtedly the result of an uncritical examination of the lexicon only (which is heavily Oghuz-based in Crimean Tatar) and less examination of the relevant phonological and morphological criteria along with a good examination of core vocabulary. (Taivo (talk) 19:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC))

The whole history and dialect section needs references. Crimean Tatar is not a mixed language, so the different dialects won't have "different origins". That is quite suspect. The southern dialects may have more Turkish lexicon, but I'm skeptical of the sections as they are written right now. It sounds like it was written by a non-linguist (in the original source), whatever that is (there are no in-line references here). (Taivo (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC))

the southern dialect is still fundamentally Kipchak

No... It is Oghuz. As I know standard Crimean Tatar, a bit of its dialects and a bit of standard Turkish I can say that Southern (Yalıboylu) dialect is very close (probably it's better to say "extremely close") to Anatolian Turkish in both grammar and lexics, the only sufficient difference is phonetics. Except for the recent borrowings from Rusiian this dialect is closer in grammar and lexics to standard Turkish than to standard Crimean Tatar. Don Alessandro (talk) 14:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is not possible for a single language to have one dialect Kipchak and the other dialect Oghuz. It is either one or the other. All the evidence that I've seen is clear that Crimean Tatar is Kipchak with the southern dialect having borrowings from Oghuz, but being fundamentally Kipchak. You just can't have two kinds of grammar in a single language. There may be borrowed morphemes from Turkish, but the dialect is either a dialect of Crimean Tatar (making it Kipchak) or it is not. (Taivo (talk) 21:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC))

And for Wikipedia purposes, your personal knowledge (whether accurate or not) doesn't count for anything. Facts must be referenced from secondary reliable sources. (Taivo (talk) 21:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC))

...this is not possible for a single language to have one dialect Kipchak and the other dialect Oghuz...

But Crimean Tatar is considered to be a single language only for ethno-political reasons (because all three branches of Crimean Tatar people consider themselves to be a one nation, use one literary standard, and consider their idioms to be dialects of one language). By the way, there are much more strange cases in the world. E.g. Italian or German "dialects". And speakers of Chinese "dialects" are not even able to understand each orther, but still their idioms are consideres to be dialects of one language - Chinese.

...your personal knowledge (whether accurate or not) doesn't count for anything...

Precisely.

Prof. Dr. Ayder Memetov, cheif of the Department of Crimean Tatar and Eastern Phylology of Taurida National University, “Zemaneviy Qırımtatar Tili” (“Modern Cimean Tatar Language”), p. 6:

…Qırımtatar tilinde bir qaç şive bar: 1) şimal (qıpçaq) şivesi; 2) cenüp (oğuz) şivesi; 3) orta yolaq (qarışıq) şivesi.

(…The Crimean Tatarlanguage has three dialects: 1) northern (Kipchak) dialect; 2) southern (Oghuz) dialect; 3) middle (mixed) dialect).

If you are interested in the subject, I can send you a mane (folk songs} lyrics in the southern dialect, so that you can compare this dialect with Turkish yourself (and "find 10 differences" :). Don Alessandro (talk) 17:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No serious linguist considers Chinese to be a single language. We all know that it is a small group of up to a dozen different, mutually unintelligible languages that only Chinese linguistic tradition calls "dialects". The same is true for linguists who specialize in Germanic and Romance linguistics. We all know that these are multiple languages with a single standard that most people learn as a second language (Arabic fits into this category as well). If the northern and southern dialects are mutually unintelligible, then there are two languages represented here. If they are mutually intelligible (without the two speakers switching to a "mixed patois") when spoken natively then they cannot have different origins. That's just the way things work. What you seem to be describing (if I understand you correctly) is a situation where the northern "dialect" is Crimean Tatar, the southern "dialect" is Crimean Turkish, and the middle dialect is a sort of mix of the two that both communities learn as a second language and is used as a standard literary form. If so, then that is not what is described in the Western linguistic literature about Crimean Tatar/Turkish. (Taivo (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC))

No serious linguist considers Chinese to be a single language.

Aha... That's it. And how about Uzbek... There are Kipchak and Oghuz dialects of Uzbek (while Uzbek itself is a Karluk language)! Why? Due to the Soviet ethnic policy there are now Kipchak and Oghuz speaking communities in Uzbekistan that consider themselves to be Uzbeks and their spoken language to be Uzbek, not Kazakh (Kipchak) or Turkmen (Oghuz). "What is language and what is dialect" is much more political question rather than linguistical.

Crimean Tatar dialects are mutually intelligible. Central (mixed) dialect is mutually intelligible with two others, and speakers of northern and southern dialects can understand each other (with some difficulties, but still) if they try not to use specific words wich are totally absent in the interlocutor's idiom. Naturally, now it is difficult to model such a situatuion, because all Crimean Tatars of the former Soviet Union know Russian and use Russian words or even totally switch to Russian if someone does not understand specific words of their dialect. But, you know, intelligibility is not a universal criterion to differ dialects from languages of their own. E.g. Turks and Azeris, Kumyks and Karachays understand each other easily, but still we do not call their languages dialects of one. By the way, Oghuz, Kipchak and Karluk Turkic languages are close to each other. Closer than branches of Romance or Slavic languages.

What you seem to be describing (if I understand you correctly) is a...

Yes. In general you have understood me correctly. There are three idioms. Speakers of all of them state that they are speaking in the single Crimean Tatar (or Crimean) language and call their three idioms dialects of this language. Literary standard scince 1920-s is based on the central (mixed) idiom/dialect (with some minimal differences). But! No one in Crimea calls neither southern nor any other dialect Crimean Turkish! Only terms Crimean Tatar or Crimean are used. The term Crimean Turkish is only used by some members of a huge Crimean Tatar diaspora in Turkey due to the Ataturkist linguistic concept of one Turkish language and its dialects (Turkey Turkish, Azeri Turkish, Uzbek Turkish, Tatar Turkish, Kazakh Turkish, Crimean Turkish, etc.) Don Alessandro (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, there are some linguistic works which label Kipchak, Oghuz, Uighur-Uzbek, etc. as single languages because of the interintelligibility. And, there is not always a clearcut measure between mutual intelligibility and non-intelligibility. There is a range. If someone understands 80% of another's speech are they mutually intelligible? How about 60%? 40%? etc. I've seen no studies of that nature between Uighur and Uzbek, for example (and, of course, nothing like that for Crimean Tatar). It's all relative. I've also heard the linguistically naive make comments like, "I can understand X perfectly" when what they actually mean is, "I can recognize a few words and logically deduce what they are talking about". I've heard Arabs say this about Persian, for example, when the topic of discussion was religion. The term "Crimean Turkish" was used by linguists in the past when the northern and southern dialects were distinguished as separate languages, it's not an Ottoman term, but a 20th century linguistic designation. Right now, the "official" linguistic designation (ISO 639-3) is "Crimean Tatar" or "Crimean Turkish" for this language, but your comment that speakers will sometimes switch to Russian leads me to believe that they may be two languages. You should also know that Northern Uzbek and Southern Uzbek are distinguished in ISO 639-3. (Taivo (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC))

Crimean Tatar language as a group of dialects

• Steppe-based Nogay dialect = Kypchak–Nogay
• Mountainous Tat dialect = Kypchak–Cuman (but also influenced by Oghuz for historical reasons)
• Southern coastal-based Yalıboylus = Oghuz

Its sounds like the Crimean Tatar language is a group of dialects of different origins. --Komitsuki (talk) 09:26, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Contradiction on Mutual Intelligibility

From this page: " It should not be confused with Tatar proper, spoken in Tatarstan and adjacent regions in Russia; the languages are related but not mutually intelligible. "

From "Tatar language": "It should not be confused with the Crimean Tatar language, to which it is closely related and with which it is mutually intelligible."

So which is it? Mutually intelligible or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.174.103 (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Not. They have been isolated for more than a century. Erkinalp9035 (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Official Status

This article is not the place to dispute the current political entities adn claims on Crimea. THe info box information is sourced and should not be deleted for POV reasons. 37.245.43.164 (talk) 12:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Please stop deny and try to legalize Russian military aggression and occupation, even if Ukrainian or/and Crimean language(s) nominally listed as official in documents of occupational administrations and if we even list it in infobox those administrations they should be marked as they are. Stop playing along with Russian officialdom and start call things by their proper names - war is war, military aggression is military aggression, illegal seizing of territories by this is military occupation. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 13:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

No, it's NPOV. We had always de facto administrative divisions on wikipedia. This is not the United Nations. Beshogur (talk) 15:44, 17 October 2023 (UTC)