The Kazakh government's after-independence language policy of "Kazakhization" has had a positive impact on the revitalization of Kazakh as an official language. The research shows that the urban Kazakh people tend to support the policy of their indigenous language revitalization, but when it comes to language use at home, the Kazakh language is not extensively used in this context (Smagulova, 2008, 2011). Informed by Spolsky's framework of language policy, this small-scale research of four urban Kazakh families examined parental ideologies towards the Kazakh language revitalization and the actual linguistic practices and the management strategies used in the home. This study revealed that while all four Kazakh families admitted the significance of the Kazakh language and supported the idea of its revitalization in the country, their language choices and efforts to maintain Kazakh vary from family to family. The findings offer new insights for researchers, policymakers, parents, and educators interested in understanding the revitalization of the Kazakh language.
Kazakh, one of today's contemporary Kipchak dialects, is a very rich language in terms of vocabulary. This vocabulary stems from the knowledge that Kazakh brought from the past and its relationship with other languages. In this study, the kinship names used in Kazakh today are emphasized. These kinship names were evaluated under two headings. Firstly, the words related to the kinship names, which are reflected in the Kazakh vocabulary from the historical periods and works of Turkish, were evaluated. In this section, the form and meaning of the word in which historical period and work is first given, as well as information about its shape and meanings in the following processes. In the second part, borrowed words from other languages that have been included in Kazakh vocabulary have been evaluated. Here, too, information is given about the language the words come from and their shape and meaning in that language. In addition, in order to reinforce the word, examples from other contemporary dialects besides Kazakh were given. Keywords: Kazakh, kinship names, vocabulary, quotation words.
Human names have a significant role in the history of humanity. However, it cannot be considered that history started from the moment when names had started being known. It is important to take into consideration mythic characters in mythological system. In this case spreading mythic characters without names is as hard as spreading myths without characters. This means that character names is the base of formation of the notion about mythological system. As well as in other countries, in Kazakh history different models of human names and the system of names that demonstrate national existence were formed. There is a tradition of giving name to a newborn child that is only intrinsic for Kazakh people. This means that Kazakh anthroponomy is distinctively significant evidence of congenital characteristics of Kazakh people, traditional Kazakh world outlook, ideology, political and social conditions in historical periods, a lifestyle closely linked to the ecosystem, and even environment and animals. The importance of Kazakh anthroponymy is that high, that it is not enough to consider it only as one of the evidences of the ethnos formation, it also should be considered that anthroponomy is a significant historical and spiritual step in arranging and settling the inherent nature of Kazakh nation that started their own way of development. It is also possible to see what beliefs Kazakh people hold, what political and ideological beliefs they were dependent on, what aspects they tried to imitate when giving names referring to historical reasons. Every literate person must understand that names such as Bitkoz, Bokbasar, Tezek, Kotibar that have negative meaning or such as Sovetkhan, Kolkhozbek, Sovkhozbek, Democrat, Decret, Mels (Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin), Kim (Communistic International of Youth), Renat (Revolution-Science-Work), Leninshil, Maskeubay, Oktyabr, Syezbek, Orysbay, Chapai, Ernest, Clara, Roza, Zhanna, Gulzhana, Asema, Gulnara are not appropriate for fresh minded, free spirited and independent Kazakh people. This means that when giving name to a newborn child it is not right to selfishly 147 choose the name, but it is important to take into account that he is the part of Kazakh ethnos. This is one way of serving to the national distinctiveness, independence and freedom.
SUMMARY: В своей статье Уильям Фирман делает попытку применить новый категориальный аппарат, предложенный Р. Брубейкером и Ф. Купером, для более нюансированного анализа процесса формирования идентичности. В частности, анализируя формирование нового политического и культурного порядка после распада СССР и роль языка в этом процессе, автор использует такие понятия, как групповая солидарность, чувство общности и чувство причастности происходящему.
Исследование исходит из двойственности советской национальной политики, которая с одной стороны поощряла сохранение национальной самобытности на территории СССР, а с другой – ставила задачу воспитания чувства солидарности в советском народе. Фирман считает, что с распадом СССР и созданием новых независимых государств ситуация продолжает оставаться двойственной. С одной стороны, во вновь образованных государствах проходит процесс этнитизации государственности, а с другой – руководство этих государств находится в поиске модели мирного развития многонационального и мультиязычного населения этих государств. Примером такой двойственности может служить Казахстан, на языковой ситуации в котором подробно останавливается автор.
Исследование анализирует статус русского языка в Казахстане, а также языковую ситуацию и политику в этом государстве. Двойственная политика Нурсултана Назарбаева, поощряющего развитие титульной нации и казахского языка и одновременно настаивающего на создании казахстанской идентичности для представителей всех национальностей, подвергается нападкам как со стороны казахских националистов, так и нетитульных национальностей. Особый интерес представляют возражения казахских националистов, которые считают опасной ориентацию Назарбаева на казахстанскую идентичность, неизбежно, по их мнению, консервирующую доминирование русского языка.
Анализируя перспективы развития казахского языка, Фирман утверждает, что в ближайшем будущем произойдет его укрепление, поскольку он функционирует как символ государственности. Укреплению языка будут способствовать и демографические изменения, ставшие следствием эмиграции русскоязычного населения и миграции сельского населения в города. Однако автор также настаивает на том, что русский язык сохранит свое распространение в Казахстане в силу требований экономического развития и эффекта глобализации.
This study explores the ethnic identification of Kazakhs living in Istanbul, Turkey who settled here in the beginning of the 1950s. Today their approximate number is 20.000. The work is going to discuss and analyse discourses and practices associated with their ethnic identifications. It particularly focuses on their self-identification and how they express and articulate their ethnic identity. The given work explores when and why they do so, what it means for them to be a Kazakh, and how their attitudes and opinions about their identity have been evolving over time. Kazakhs had to leave their historical homeland, Xinjiang-Uyghur Autonomous Region (Eastern Turkestan) after unsuccessful uprisings against the Chinese government in the 1930s and 1940s. After spending sometime in India, they applied for asylum in Turkey. Here they were accepted as iskanlı goçmenler, i.e. as migrants with Turkish ancestry and closely affiliated to Turkish culture. Therefore, analysing the ethnic identifications of Kazakhs in Turkey presents an interesting case, because on one hand they are regarded as Turks/Turkish, and on the other hand, despite this popular assumption, they still stand out from the majority of people, partially because of their physical appearance. Therefore, this ambiguous nature of being "Turk, but not quite" makes the case of Kazakhs unique and interesting. The work aims to demonstrate that like other types of identities, Kazakh ethnic identity is not fixed and bounded, instead it is flexible and fit for various negotiations and changes depending on personal and social relations of the people as well as national and international contexts. ; Bu çalışma, 1950'lerde İstanbul'da yerleşmiş Kazakların etnik kimliklerini araştırmaktadır. Bugün yaklaşık sayıları 20.000'dir. Çalışma, etnik kimlikleriyle ilişkili söylemleri ve uygulamaları tartışacak ve analiz edecektir. Özellikle kendilerini kimliklendirme üzerine odaklanacak ve etnik kimliklerini nasıl ifade ettiklerini inceleyecektir. Söz konusu çalışma ne zaman ve neden öyle davrandıklarını, Kazak olmalarının ne anlama geldiğini ve kimlikleri hakkındaki tutumlarının ve görüşlerinin zaman içinde nasıl geliştiğini araştırıyor. Kazaklar kendi tarihi vatanı Sincan Uygur Özerk Bölgesi'ni (Doğu Türkistan). 20. yüzyılın 30'lu ve 40'lı yıllarında Çin hükümetine karşı yapılan başarısız ayaklanmalardan sonra terketmiştir. Hindistan'da biraz zaman geçirdikten sonra Türkiye'ye iltica başvurusunda bulundular. Bu nedenle, Türkiye'deki Kazakların etnik kimliklerinin analiz edilmesi ilginç bir durum teşkil etmektedir, çünkü bir yandan Türk olarak kabul edilirler, diğer yandan bu popüler varsayıma rağmen, kısmen fiziksel görünümleri nedeniyle insanların çoğunluğundan öne çıkmaktadırlar. Bu nedenle, "Türk, ama tam olarak değil" olmanın bu muğlak doğası Kazakların durumunu eşsiz ve ilginç kılmaktadır. Çalışma, diğer kimlik türlerinde olduğu gibi Kazak etnik kimliğinin de sabit ve sınırlı olmadığını, bunun yerine, insanların kişisel ve sosyal ilişkilerinin yanı sıra ulusal ve uluslararası bağlamlara bağlı olarak çeşitli müzakere ve değişimlere uygun ve esnek olduğunu göstermeyi amaçlamaktadır.
