XVII. YÜZYIL RUMELİ ÇITAK AĞZININ GÜNÜMÜZ TÜRKİYE AĞIZLARINDAKİ GÖRÜNÜMÜ
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2017
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi, XVII. yüzyıl Türk dili, kültürü, tarihi araştırmacıları için en değerli kaynaklardandır. Eserde Ortadoğu'dan Orta Avrupa'ya, Kafkasya'dan Mısır'a kadar bölgelerdeki diller hakkında bilgiler ve tespitler yer almaktadır. Bunun yanı sıra Türkçenin muhtelif lehçe ve ağızları hakkında da son derece önemli veriler sunulmuştur. 100 yılıdır Evliya Çelebi'nin bu tür verileri bilim adamları tarafından incelenmektedir. Seyahatname'de Türkiye Türkçesinin hem Anadolu grubu ağızları hakkında (H. Eren, M. Duman, H. Develi, M. Aydın) hem de Rumeli grubunun tarihî dönemleri hakkında verilen bilgiler çeşitli araştırmacılar tarafından değerlendirilmiştir (A. Günşen, G. Gülsevin, A. İğci). Evliya Çelebi'nin eserinde bahsettiği Türk gruplarından biri de Rumeli'de yaşayan 'Çıtak'lardır. O dönemde Çıtakların yaşadığı yerlerden bazıları da Seyahatname'de kaydedilmiştir: Çayırlı köyü (Deliorman nahiyesinde), Yanbolu, Dırama, Hıdırağa köyü, Alaybeği köyü, Kızanlık/Kıza?lık kasabası, Dobruca vd. Evliya Çelebi'nin bir Rumeli halkı olarak 'Çıtak'lardan bahsederken kaydettiği ağız özellikleri de son derece değerlidir. Birkaç örnek: hışır 'kavun' (III. 125a.), hışırka "karpuz" (III. 125a.), çogaş 'güneş' (III. 125a.), koza 'kaplıca, ılıca' (V. 174a.), napayın ' ne yapayım' (III. 125a.), sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece edesik 'voyvadamız ne emrederse öyle yapalım' (VIII. 207b.). Bugün Anadolu'nun da çeşitli yerlerinde yaşamakta olan ve Rumeli'den göç etmiş oldukları söylenen Çıtakların ağız özellikleri, bildiğim kadarıyla, müstakil bir çalışmaya konu olmuş değildir. Bu makalede, Evliya Çelebi'nin XVII. yüzyılda Rumeli'de yaşayan Çıtakların dili hakkında kaydettiği veriler değerlendirilecek, günümüz Türkiye ağızlarında o ayırıcı dil özelliklerinin yayılma alanları gösterilmeye çalışılacaktır. Evliya Çelebi'nin Çıtak ağzı özelliği olarak bahsettiği dil unsurlarının tarihî ve yaşayan Türk lehçelerindeki bağlantıları da gösterilecektir. Elden edilen malzemeye dayanılarak günümüz Çıtaklarının ağız özellikleri değerlendirilecektir. Sonuç olarak bu makalede şu sorulara cevap aranmıştır: 1. XVII. yüzyıl Rumeli Çıtaklarının ağız özellikleri olarak verilenler bugün nerelerde yaşıyor? Anadolu'da herhangi bir bölgenin ağzıyla yüksek oranda ortaklık gösteriyor mu veya herhangi bir ağız bölgesinde düzenli ve anlamlı haritalar oluşturabiliyor mu? 2. Günümüzde Anadolu'da yaşayan Çıtakların ağız özellikleri XVII. yüzyıl Rumeli Çıtaklarının ağız özellikleri ile ne derecede benzerlik gösteriyor? 3. Günümüzde Anadolu'da yaşayan Çıtakların ağız özellikleri ile XVII. yüzyıl Rumeli Çıtaklarının ağız özellikleri arasındaki benzer yönler veya benzememe durumları ne ifade etmektedir?
The Travel Book of Evliya Çelebi is one of the most valuable sources for the researchers of Turkish language, culture, and history. The work consists of information and determinations about languages in the regions such as the Middle East, the Central Europe, the Caucasus, and Egypt. Besides, the work presents crucial data on several dialects of Turkish which have been studied by the scientists over the past 100 years. While some scientists (H. Eren, M. Duman, H. Develi, M. Aydın) have studied the Anatolian dialects mentioned in the Book, others (A. Günşen, . Gülsevin, A. İğci) have studied and evaluated the data given about the historical periods of Rumelian dialects. One of the Turkish groups that Evliya Çelebi mentioned in his Book is the ‘Çıtak’s. In the Book, where they lived at that time is also recorded: Çayırlı village (in Deliorman), Yanbolu, Dırama, Hıdırağa village, Alaybeği village, Kızanlık/Kızanlık town, Dobruca, et al. The dialectological features Evliya Çelebi recorded while he was mentioning the Çıtaks are also utmost important. A few examples: hışır ‘melon’ (III. 125a), hışırka ‘watermelon’ (III. 125a.), çogaş ‘sun’ (III. 125a.), koza ‘hot spring’ (V. 174a.), napayın ‘what will I do’ (III. 125a.), sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece edesik ‘let us do what our voivode orders’ (VIII. 207b.). The dialectological characteristics of the Çıtaks, who are said to have migrated from the Rumelia and live in Anatolia today, has not been studied independently as far as I know. In this paper, I will evaluate the data Evliya Çelebi recorded about the dialect of the Çıtaks, who lived in the Rumelia in the XVIIth century, and show the ranges of those distinct linguistic features among contemporary Turkish dialects. Besides, the relation between the linguistic features that Evliya Çelebi recorded as Çıtak features and the historical and contemporary dialects will also be shown. Through the data obtained, the dialectological features of presents Çıtaks will be evaluated. In conclusion the following questions have been tried to be answered in the paper: 1. Today where do we find the dialectological characteristics that were recorded as the Çıtak characteristics of the XVIIth century Rumelia? Does it have powerful common features with an Anatolian dialect or can we create maps regular and meaning maps in any dialectological region? 2. To what extent does the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia resemble that of the XVIIth century of Rumelia? 3. What do the similarities or non-similarities between the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia and that of the 17th century of Rumelia refer to?Introduction The Travel Book of Evliya Çelebi is one of the most valuable sources for the researchers of Turkish language, culture, and history. The work consists of information and determinations about languages in the regions such as the Middle East, the Central Europe, the Caucasus, and Egypt. Besides, the work presents crucial data on several dialects of Turkish which have been studied by the scientists over the past 100 years. While some scientists (H. Eren, M. Duman, H. Develi, M. Aydın) have studied the Anatolian dialects mentioned in the Book, others (A. Günşen, G. Gülsevin, A. İğci) have studied and evaluated the data given about the historical periods of Rumelian dialects. Conclusion and Discussion One of the Turkish groups that Evliya Çelebi mentioned in his Book is the ‘Çıtak’s. In the Book, where they lived at that time is also recorded: Çayırlı village (in Deliorman), Yanbolu, Dırama, Hıdırağa village, Alaybeği village, Kızanlık/Kızanlık town, Dobruca, et al. The dialectological features Evliya Çelebi recorded while he was mentioning the Çıtaks are also utmost important. A few examples: hışır ‘melon’ (III. 125a), hışırka ‘watermelon’ (III. 125a.), çogaş ‘sun’ (III. 125a.), koza ‘hot spring’ (V. 174a.), napayın ‘what will I do’ (III. 125a.), sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece edesik ‘let us do what our voivode orders’ (VIII. 207b.). The dialectological characteristics of the Çıtaks, who are said to have migrated from the Rumelia and live in Anatolia today, has not been studied independently as far as I know.In this paper, I will evaluate the data Evliya Çelebi recorded about the dialect of the Çıtaks, who lived in the Rumelia in the XVIIth century, and show the ranges of those distinct linguistic features among contemporary Turkish dialects. Besides, the relation between the linguistic features that Evliya Çelebi recorded as Çıtak features and the historical and contemporary dialects will also be shown. Through the data obtained, the dialectological features of presents Çıtaks will be evaluated. Evliya Çelebi, in the pages (III.120a) (III.125a) (V.174a) (VI.53a) (VIII.207b) of his book gives the words following belonging to the language of the Çıtaks living in the Rumelia: alabaş : kohlrabi (III.120a) alaf : straw (III.120a) alatla- : to make haste (III.120a) aydı vir- : to say something suddenly, to ejaculate (III.120a), (III.125a) baytâl cavı : horse’s penis (III.120a) , (III.125a) baytalı akıt- : to give water to horse (III.120a) , (III.125a) börk : fur cap (III.120a) , (III.125a) çalma : turban (III.120a) , (III.125a) çogaç : sun (III.120a) , (III.125a) çorbacı ne apar: what is your elder landlord doing (III.120a), (III.125a) defke : girl (III.120a) , (III.125a) göyün : furnace, hearth (III.125a) hışır : melon (III.120a) , (III.125a) hışırka : watermelon (III.120a) , (III.125a) kalâyık : concubine, female slave (III.120a) , (III.125a) kavra- : to bring (III.120a) , (III.125a) keremi? aydı vereyin : let me tell your good (III.120a) , (III.125a) kopayın : completely, entrely (III.125a) kopayın ne apayın : what will I do entirely (III.120a) meçikli : pestilence, plague (III.120a) , (III.125a) napayın : what will I do (III.125a) ocak : fire (III.120a) , (III.125a) ocak getir- : to bring fire (III.120a) ocak kavra- : to bring fire (III.120a) , (III.125a) ö? beni : wait for me (III.120a) , (III.125a) örp : horse’s testicle (III.120a) , (III.125a) selâm ayıtdım : peace be with you (III.120a) , (III.125a) şikâst oldum : I got sick (III.120a) , (III.125a) tahırla- : to defer, to adjourn (III.120a) , (III.125a) yundum kulunı : newborn foal (III.120a), , (III.125a) kademli morvan : good man (III.125a) koza : hot spring (V.174a) kıza? : lad (VI.53a) hulalama- : not to make haste (VIII.207b) gilimiz de bile misik : we were altogether (VIII.207b) saryife edelim acalur : let’s counsel how it will be (VIII.207b) sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece idesik : let us do what our voivode orders (VIII.207b) an ?olayına ~ ankolayına : they use the phrase “an kolayın” a lot between each sentence (VIII.207b) Results In conclusion the following questions have been tried to be answered in the paper: 1. Today where do we find the dialectological characteristics that were recorded as the Çıtak characteristics of the XVIIth century Rumelia? Does it have powerful common features with an Anatolian dialect or can we create maps regular and meaningful maps in any dialectological region? 2. To what extent does the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia resemble that of the XVIIth century of Rumelia? 3. What do the similarities or non-similarities between the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia and that of the 17th century of Rumelia refer to?
The Travel Book of Evliya Çelebi is one of the most valuable sources for the researchers of Turkish language, culture, and history. The work consists of information and determinations about languages in the regions such as the Middle East, the Central Europe, the Caucasus, and Egypt. Besides, the work presents crucial data on several dialects of Turkish which have been studied by the scientists over the past 100 years. While some scientists (H. Eren, M. Duman, H. Develi, M. Aydın) have studied the Anatolian dialects mentioned in the Book, others (A. Günşen, . Gülsevin, A. İğci) have studied and evaluated the data given about the historical periods of Rumelian dialects. One of the Turkish groups that Evliya Çelebi mentioned in his Book is the ‘Çıtak’s. In the Book, where they lived at that time is also recorded: Çayırlı village (in Deliorman), Yanbolu, Dırama, Hıdırağa village, Alaybeği village, Kızanlık/Kızanlık town, Dobruca, et al. The dialectological features Evliya Çelebi recorded while he was mentioning the Çıtaks are also utmost important. A few examples: hışır ‘melon’ (III. 125a), hışırka ‘watermelon’ (III. 125a.), çogaş ‘sun’ (III. 125a.), koza ‘hot spring’ (V. 174a.), napayın ‘what will I do’ (III. 125a.), sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece edesik ‘let us do what our voivode orders’ (VIII. 207b.). The dialectological characteristics of the Çıtaks, who are said to have migrated from the Rumelia and live in Anatolia today, has not been studied independently as far as I know. In this paper, I will evaluate the data Evliya Çelebi recorded about the dialect of the Çıtaks, who lived in the Rumelia in the XVIIth century, and show the ranges of those distinct linguistic features among contemporary Turkish dialects. Besides, the relation between the linguistic features that Evliya Çelebi recorded as Çıtak features and the historical and contemporary dialects will also be shown. Through the data obtained, the dialectological features of presents Çıtaks will be evaluated. In conclusion the following questions have been tried to be answered in the paper: 1. Today where do we find the dialectological characteristics that were recorded as the Çıtak characteristics of the XVIIth century Rumelia? Does it have powerful common features with an Anatolian dialect or can we create maps regular and meaning maps in any dialectological region? 2. To what extent does the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia resemble that of the XVIIth century of Rumelia? 3. What do the similarities or non-similarities between the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia and that of the 17th century of Rumelia refer to?Introduction The Travel Book of Evliya Çelebi is one of the most valuable sources for the researchers of Turkish language, culture, and history. The work consists of information and determinations about languages in the regions such as the Middle East, the Central Europe, the Caucasus, and Egypt. Besides, the work presents crucial data on several dialects of Turkish which have been studied by the scientists over the past 100 years. While some scientists (H. Eren, M. Duman, H. Develi, M. Aydın) have studied the Anatolian dialects mentioned in the Book, others (A. Günşen, G. Gülsevin, A. İğci) have studied and evaluated the data given about the historical periods of Rumelian dialects. Conclusion and Discussion One of the Turkish groups that Evliya Çelebi mentioned in his Book is the ‘Çıtak’s. In the Book, where they lived at that time is also recorded: Çayırlı village (in Deliorman), Yanbolu, Dırama, Hıdırağa village, Alaybeği village, Kızanlık/Kızanlık town, Dobruca, et al. The dialectological features Evliya Çelebi recorded while he was mentioning the Çıtaks are also utmost important. A few examples: hışır ‘melon’ (III. 125a), hışırka ‘watermelon’ (III. 125a.), çogaş ‘sun’ (III. 125a.), koza ‘hot spring’ (V. 174a.), napayın ‘what will I do’ (III. 125a.), sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece edesik ‘let us do what our voivode orders’ (VIII. 207b.). The dialectological characteristics of the Çıtaks, who are said to have migrated from the Rumelia and live in Anatolia today, has not been studied independently as far as I know.In this paper, I will evaluate the data Evliya Çelebi recorded about the dialect of the Çıtaks, who lived in the Rumelia in the XVIIth century, and show the ranges of those distinct linguistic features among contemporary Turkish dialects. Besides, the relation between the linguistic features that Evliya Çelebi recorded as Çıtak features and the historical and contemporary dialects will also be shown. Through the data obtained, the dialectological features of presents Çıtaks will be evaluated. Evliya Çelebi, in the pages (III.120a) (III.125a) (V.174a) (VI.53a) (VIII.207b) of his book gives the words following belonging to the language of the Çıtaks living in the Rumelia: alabaş : kohlrabi (III.120a) alaf : straw (III.120a) alatla- : to make haste (III.120a) aydı vir- : to say something suddenly, to ejaculate (III.120a), (III.125a) baytâl cavı : horse’s penis (III.120a) , (III.125a) baytalı akıt- : to give water to horse (III.120a) , (III.125a) börk : fur cap (III.120a) , (III.125a) çalma : turban (III.120a) , (III.125a) çogaç : sun (III.120a) , (III.125a) çorbacı ne apar: what is your elder landlord doing (III.120a), (III.125a) defke : girl (III.120a) , (III.125a) göyün : furnace, hearth (III.125a) hışır : melon (III.120a) , (III.125a) hışırka : watermelon (III.120a) , (III.125a) kalâyık : concubine, female slave (III.120a) , (III.125a) kavra- : to bring (III.120a) , (III.125a) keremi? aydı vereyin : let me tell your good (III.120a) , (III.125a) kopayın : completely, entrely (III.125a) kopayın ne apayın : what will I do entirely (III.120a) meçikli : pestilence, plague (III.120a) , (III.125a) napayın : what will I do (III.125a) ocak : fire (III.120a) , (III.125a) ocak getir- : to bring fire (III.120a) ocak kavra- : to bring fire (III.120a) , (III.125a) ö? beni : wait for me (III.120a) , (III.125a) örp : horse’s testicle (III.120a) , (III.125a) selâm ayıtdım : peace be with you (III.120a) , (III.125a) şikâst oldum : I got sick (III.120a) , (III.125a) tahırla- : to defer, to adjourn (III.120a) , (III.125a) yundum kulunı : newborn foal (III.120a), , (III.125a) kademli morvan : good man (III.125a) koza : hot spring (V.174a) kıza? : lad (VI.53a) hulalama- : not to make haste (VIII.207b) gilimiz de bile misik : we were altogether (VIII.207b) saryife edelim acalur : let’s counsel how it will be (VIII.207b) sulubayımız neçik buyuramış eylece idesik : let us do what our voivode orders (VIII.207b) an ?olayına ~ ankolayına : they use the phrase “an kolayın” a lot between each sentence (VIII.207b) Results In conclusion the following questions have been tried to be answered in the paper: 1. Today where do we find the dialectological characteristics that were recorded as the Çıtak characteristics of the XVIIth century Rumelia? Does it have powerful common features with an Anatolian dialect or can we create maps regular and meaningful maps in any dialectological region? 2. To what extent does the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia resemble that of the XVIIth century of Rumelia? 3. What do the similarities or non-similarities between the present Çıtak dialect of Anatolia and that of the 17th century of Rumelia refer to?
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Sosyal Bilimler, Disiplinler Arası
Kaynak
Turkish Studies (Elektronik)
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
12
Sayı
30
