Turkish Equivalents of Arabic Adjective Patterns in Karakhanid Turkish Qur’an Translation, Adjectival Participle and Derivational Suffixes

Bekir Sarıkaya

Article Details

Turkish Equivalents of Arabic Adjective Patterns in Karakhanid Turkish Qur’an Translation, Adjectival Participle and Derivational Suffixes

Authors:

Bekir Sarıkaya

Publisher:

Hitit University

Main Topics:

Türk İslam Edebiyatı | Edebi Çalışmalar (Diğer)

Journal:

Hitit İlahiyat Dergisi Vol.23 Issue 1, pp.538-578

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001322098

pISSN:

2757-6949

Keywords:

Abstract:

 Researchers who benefited from the publications of Quran translations during the Karahanid period have contributed to the Turkish language by conducting studies on topics such as the beautiful names of Allah, religious terms, and abstract words. In their studies, they have documented that many of the words from Karahanid Turkish, which is a historical Turkish dialect, have become archaic in Contemporary Türkiye Turkish and have documented the frequency of usage of Turkish verb bases. This study was conducted to contribute to the research on the identified topics. In the study, the archaic words, Turkish verb bases, and the equivalents of predetermined Arabic patterns in the Line-by-Line Quran Translation in Karahanid Turkish, without disrupting the syntax of the Quran, were examined morphologically and semantically. The study was delimited to the Surahs of Yâsin, Fath, and Mulk. In these Surahs, Turkish equivalents of the subjects and objects related to the execution of the verb, such as the fâil, mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl forms, were determined. Throughout the study, the equivalents were compared in terms of translation and meaning. The verb bases and derivatives in the equivalents were examined both in terms of their structures and meanings. In the translation, it has been observed that the translation of words is done more in the context of their own patterns rather than the syntax context. This situation has facilitated a better understanding of Arabic patterns and their equivalents in terms of structure and meaning, making comparison easier. Additionally, it has been noted that the passive, causative, and reflexive suffixes, which determine the relationships of subjects and objects in the execution of the verb, are frequently used in the translation, expanding the semantic framework of verbs. However, in the meanings, it is observed that these suffixes are not used much. According to the translation method based on meaning, situations arising from the translation that hinder the comparison of equivalents have also been identified. Expressing pattern equivalents with different word groups, such as adverbs and conjugated verbs, preferring different basic, derived, and figurative meanings of Arabic patterns, or selecting Arabic-Persian words as equivalents to Arabic words have hindered the comparison of patterns with their equivalents. Additionally, the fact that these issues observed in the translation are also present in the interpretation indicates that Türkiye Turkish is a continuation of the Karahanid Turkish period. As a result of the comparisons, 177 examples were identified in the text as equivalent to the phrases ism fâil, ism mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl. It was observed that 58 percent of the examples were adjectives expressing temporary adjectives and 42 percent were words or word groups using derivational suffixes that formed permanent adjectives. The high rate of adjectival participles, at 58 percent, can be considered as an effort to find adjectival participle equivalents for Arabic patterns. These data indicate that the adjectival participle structure is frequently used as a counterpart to Arabic patterns. It should be noted that the archaism rate of the words taken as examples in the context of Karahanlı Turkish and Türkiye Turkish is quite high, at around 89 percent. The number of words not used in Türkiye Turkish is 85 50 percent, while the number of words with differences in meaning or spelling is 65 39 percent. Consequently, it becomes evident that Türkiye Turkish is deprived of the richness of Turkish verb bases at a rate of 50 percent that did not reach from the Karahanlı period to the present day. In sum, the translator has demonstrated the presence of distinctive usage patterns of Karahanlı Turkish, a standardized language, in this work. The high proportion of Turkish words in the Karahanlı era translation of the Quran, as evidenced by the translators sensitivity to translation, indicates consideration for the Arabic-illiterate population. As understood from the conducted studies, this is also comprehensible by linguists. In order for contemporary readers to benefit from the legacy of Quran translations, researchers need to conduct studies on Quran translations. Quran translations are a rich source for many topics in language studies. Many areas remain unexplored, such as the parallel and past syntax of translation texts, Turkish equivalents of Arabic verbs and derivatives, and the semantic analysis of Turkish verbs.

 Researchers who benefited from the publications of Quran translations during the Karahanid period have contributed to the Turkish language by conducting studies on topics such as the beautiful names of Allah, religious terms, and abstract words. In their studies, they have documented that many of the words from Karahanid Turkish, which is a historical Turkish dialect, have become archaic in Contemporary Türkiye Turkish and have documented the frequency of usage of Turkish verb bases. This study was conducted to contribute to the research on the identified topics. In the study, the archaic words, Turkish verb bases, and the equivalents of predetermined Arabic patterns in the Line-by-Line Quran Translation in Karahanid Turkish, without disrupting the syntax of the Quran, were examined morphologically and semantically. The study was delimited to the Surahs of Yâsin, Fath, and Mulk. In these Surahs, Turkish equivalents of the subjects and objects related to the execution of the verb, such as the fâil, mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl forms, were determined. Throughout the study, the equivalents were compared in terms of translation and meaning. The verb bases and derivatives in the equivalents were examined both in terms of their structures and meanings. In the translation, it has been observed that the translation of words is done more in the context of their own patterns rather than the syntax context. This situation has facilitated a better understanding of Arabic patterns and their equivalents in terms of structure and meaning, making comparison easier. Additionally, it has been noted that the passive, causative, and reflexive suffixes, which determine the relationships of subjects and objects in the execution of the verb, are frequently used in the translation, expanding the semantic framework of verbs. However, in the meanings, it is observed that these suffixes are not used much. According to the translation method based on meaning, situations arising from the translation that hinder the comparison of equivalents have also been identified. Expressing pattern equivalents with different word groups, such as adverbs and conjugated verbs, preferring different basic, derived, and figurative meanings of Arabic patterns, or selecting Arabic-Persian words as equivalents to Arabic words have hindered the comparison of patterns with their equivalents. Additionally, the fact that these issues observed in the translation are also present in the interpretation indicates that Türkiye Turkish is a continuation of the Karahanid Turkish period. As a result of the comparisons, 177 examples were identified in the text as equivalent to the phrases ism fâil, ism mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl. It was observed that 58 percent of the examples were adjectives expressing temporary adjectives and 42 percent were words or word groups using derivational suffixes that formed permanent adjectives. The high rate of adjectival participles, at 58 percent, can be considered as an effort to find adjectival participle equivalents for Arabic patterns. These data indicate that the adjectival participle structure is frequently used as a counterpart to Arabic patterns. It should be noted that the archaism rate of the words taken as examples in the context of Karahanlı Turkish and Türkiye Turkish is quite high, at around 89 percent. The number of words not used in Türkiye Turkish is 85 50 percent, while the number of words with differences in meaning or spelling is 65 39 percent. Consequently, it becomes evident that Türkiye Turkish is deprived of the richness of Turkish verb bases at a rate of 50 percent that did not reach from the Karahanlı period to the present day. In sum, the translator has demonstrated the presence of distinctive usage patterns of Karahanlı Turkish, a standardized language, in this work. The high proportion of Turkish words in the Karahanlı era translation of the Quran, as evidenced by the translators sensitivity to translation, indicates consideration for the Arabic-illiterate population. As understood from the conducted studies, this is also comprehensible by linguists. In order for contemporary readers to benefit from the legacy of Quran translations, researchers need to conduct studies on Quran translations. Quran translations are a rich source for many topics in language studies. Many areas remain unexplored, such as the parallel and past syntax of translation texts, Turkish equivalents of Arabic verbs and derivatives, and the semantic analysis of Turkish verbs.

 Researchers who benefited from the publications of Quran translations during the Karahanid period have contributed to the Turkish language by conducting studies on topics such as the beautiful names of Allah, religious terms, and abstract words. In their studies, they have documented that many of the words from Karahanid Turkish, which is a historical Turkish dialect, have become archaic in Contemporary Türkiye Turkish and have documented the frequency of usage of Turkish verb bases. This study was conducted to contribute to the research on the identified topics. In the study, the archaic words, Turkish verb bases, and the equivalents of predetermined Arabic patterns in the Line-by-Line Quran Translation in Karahanid Turkish, without disrupting the syntax of the Quran, were examined morphologically and semantically. The study was delimited to the Surahs of Yâsin, Fath, and Mulk. In these Surahs, Turkish equivalents of the subjects and objects related to the execution of the verb, such as the fâil, mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl forms, were determined. Throughout the study, the equivalents were compared in terms of translation and meaning. The verb bases and derivatives in the equivalents were examined both in terms of their structures and meanings. In the translation, it has been observed that the translation of words is done more in the context of their own patterns rather than the syntax context. This situation has facilitated a better understanding of Arabic patterns and their equivalents in terms of structure and meaning, making comparison easier. Additionally, it has been noted that the passive, causative, and reflexive suffixes, which determine the relationships of subjects and objects in the execution of the verb, are frequently used in the translation, expanding the semantic framework of verbs. However, in the meanings, it is observed that these suffixes are not used much. According to the translation method based on meaning, situations arising from the translation that hinder the comparison of equivalents have also been identified. Expressing pattern equivalents with different word groups, such as adverbs and conjugated verbs, preferring different basic, derived, and figurative meanings of Arabic patterns, or selecting Arabic-Persian words as equivalents to Arabic words have hindered the comparison of patterns with their equivalents. Additionally, the fact that these issues observed in the translation are also present in the interpretation indicates that Türkiye Turkish is a continuation of the Karahanid Turkish period. As a result of the comparisons, 177 examples were identified in the text as equivalent to the phrases ism fâil, ism mefûl, mubâlagha ism fâil, al-sifa al-mushabbaha, ism tafdîl. It was observed that 58 percent of the examples were adjectives expressing temporary adjectives and 42 percent were words or word groups using derivational suffixes that formed permanent adjectives. The high rate of adjectival participles, at 58 percent, can be considered as an effort to find adjectival participle equivalents for Arabic patterns. These data indicate that the adjectival participle structure is frequently used as a counterpart to Arabic patterns. It should be noted that the archaism rate of the words taken as examples in the context of Karahanlı Turkish and Türkiye Turkish is quite high, at around 89 percent. The number of words not used in Türkiye Turkish is 85 50 percent, while the number of words with differences in meaning or spelling is 65 39 percent. Consequently, it becomes evident that Türkiye Turkish is deprived of the richness of Turkish verb bases at a rate of 50 percent that did not reach from the Karahanlı period to the present day. In sum, the translator has demonstrated the presence of distinctive usage patterns of Karahanlı Turkish, a standardized language, in this work. The high proportion of Turkish words in the Karahanlı era translation of the Quran, as evidenced by the translators sensitivity to translation, indicates consideration for the Arabic-illiterate population. As understood from the conducted studies, this is also comprehensible by linguists. In order for contemporary readers to benefit from the legacy of Quran translations, researchers need to conduct studies on Quran translations. Quran translations are a rich source for many topics in language studies. Many areas remain unexplored, such as the parallel and past syntax of translation texts, Turkish equivalents of Arabic verbs and derivatives, and the semantic analysis of Turkish verbs.

 Karahanlı dönemi Kuran tercümeleri neşirlerinden faydalanan araştırmacılar esmâ-i hüsnâ, dini terimler, soyut kelimeler gibi konularda çalışmalar yaparak Türk diline katkıda bulunmuşlar, çalışmalarında tarihi Türk lehçesi olan Karahanlı Türkçesindeki kelimelerin büyük bir kısmının Türkiye Türkçesinde eskicil hâle geldiğini ve ayrıca Türkçe fiil tabanlarının kullanım sıklığını belirlemişlerdir. Belirlenen konulardaki çalışmalara katkı sağlamak amacıyla bu çalışma yapılmıştır. Çalışmada Kurân-ı Kerîmin söz dizimi bozulmadan yapılan Karahanlı Türkçesi Satır Arası Kuran Çevirisindeki eskicil kelimeler, Türkçe fiil tabanları ve belirlenen Arapça kalıpların karşılığı olan kelimeler morfolojik ve semantik açıdan incelenmiştir. Çalışma; Yâsîn, Fetih ve Mülk sûreleriyle sınırlandırılmıştır. Bu sûrelerde, fiilin icrâsıyla ilgili olan özneleri ve nesneleri belirten fâil, mefûl, mübâlağa ism-i fâil, sıfat-ı müşebbehe, ism-i tafdîl kalıplarının Türkçe karşılıkları tespit edilmiştir. Karşılıklar çalışma boyunca tercüme ve meâl bağlamında karşılaştırılmıştır. Karşılıklardaki fiil tabanları ve türevleri hem yapıları hem de anlamları bakımından incelenmiştir. Tercümede kelimelerin çevirisinin söz dizimi bağlamından ziyade kendi kalıpları bağlamında yapıldığı gözlemlenmiştir. Bu durum Arapça kalıpların ve karşılıklarının yapı ve anlam bakımından daha iyi anlaşılmasını sağlamış ve karşılaştırma yapmayı kolaylaştırmıştır. Ayrıca, tercümede fiilin icrâsında yer alan öznelerin ve nesnelerin ilişkilerini belirleyen edilgenlik, oldurganlık ve dönüşlülük çatı eklerinin sık kullanılmasının fiillerin anlam çerçevesini genişlettiği tespit edilmiş, meâllerde ise bu çatı eklerinin pek kullanılmadığı görülmüştür. Anlamına göre tercüme metodu gereği yapılan çeviriden kaynaklanan ve karşılıkların mukayesesine engel olan durumlar da tespit edilmiştir. Kalıp karşılıklarının farklı kelime grubu, zarf ve çekimli fiil gibi değişik yapılarla aktarılması, Arapça kalıbın birbirinden farklı temel, yan ve mecaz anlamlarının tercih edilmesi veya Arapça kelimeye Arapça Farsça kelimelerin karşılık olarak seçilmesi, kalıpların karşılıklarıyla mukayesesini engellemiştir. Tercümede ve meâlde sorunların aynı olması ve çözümlerin aynı dil bilgisel kurallarla çözümlenmesi, Türkiye Türkçesinin Karahanlı Türkçesinin devamı olduğunu göstermiştir. Yapılan karşılaştırmalar neticesinde metinde ism-i fâil, ism-i mefûl, mübâlağa ism-i fâil, sıfat-ı müşebbehe, ism-i tafdîl kalıplarının karşılığı olarak 177 tanık tespit edilmiştir. Tanıkların 58inin geçici sıfat ifade eden sıfat-fiil, 42sinin kalıcı sıfat yapan eklerden türetilen kelime veya kelime grubu olduğu görülmüştür. Sıfat-fiillerin karşılık olma oranının 58 gibi yüksek olması, Arapça kalıplara sıfat-fiille karşılık bulma çabası olarak değerlendirilebilir. Tercümede fâil ve mefʻûl kalıbında mIş sıfat-fiil eki ile lXg isim yapım eki, fâil ve sıfat-ı müşebbehe kalıbında -XglI sıfat-fiil eki, mübâlağa ism-i fâil ve sıfat-ı müşebbehe kalıbında -gAn sıfat-fiil eki, ism-i tafdîl kalıbında rAk isim yapım eki tercih edilmiştir. Bu veriler de Arapça kalıba mukabil sıfat-fiil yapısının sıkça kullanıldığını gösterir. Hatta bazen türü sıfat olan kelime tek başına yeterli görülmez ve yardımcı fiil yardımıyla sıfat-fiile dönüştürülür. Karahanlı Türkçesi ile Türkiye Türkçesi bağlamında tanık olarak alınan kelimelerin eskicillik oranının da 89 gibi oldukça yüksek olduğunu belirtmek gerekir. Türkiye Türkçesinde hiç kullanılmayan kelime sayısının 85 50, anlamında veya yazımında farklılık olan kelime sayısının 65 39 olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Tercümedeki fiil icrâcılarını bildiren kalıplara karşılık sunulan ve en çok kullanıldığı gözlemlenen -mIş, -gAn ve -XglI sıfat-fiil eklerinden -gAn ve -XglI eklerinin Türkiye Türkçesinde eskiciller listesine girdiği görülür. Bunlara bağlı olarak Türkiye Türkçesi, Karahanlı döneminden günümüze ulaşamayan 50 oranındaki Türkçe fiil tabanının zenginliğinden, bir kısmı varyantlarıyla Anadolu ağızlarında yaşasa da, mahrum kaldığı ortaya çıkar. Özetle mütercim ölçünlü bir dil olan Karahanlı Türkçesinin kendine özgü kullanım kalıplarını özgün bir şekilde kullanmıştır. Mütercimin tercümede hassasiyet göstererek ortaya koyduğu Karahanlı dönemi Kuran tercümesinde Türkçe kelimelerin oranının çok yüksek olması, Arapça bilmeyen halkını da göz önünde bulundurduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca bu eser üzerine yapılan çalışmalar eserin dil bilimciler tarafından anlaşıldığını göstermektedir. Günümüz okuyucularının da Kuran tercümesi yadigarlarından faydalanabilmeleri, araştırmacıların Kuran tercümeleri üzerine daha çok çalışmalar yapmalarına bağlıdır. Kuran tercümelerinde çeviri metinlerinin eş ve art zamanlı söz dizimi, Arapça fiillerin ve türevlerinin karşılığı olan Türkçe fiiller, Türkçe fiillerin semantik açıdan incelenmesi gibi başlıklarla birçok çalışma yapılmalıdır.

Article Details

Turkish Equivalents of Arabic Adjective Patterns in Karakhanid Turkish Qur’an Translation, Adjectival Participle and Derivational Suffixes

Authors:

Bekir Sarıkaya

Publisher:

Hitit University

Main Topics:

Türk İslam Edebiyatı | Edebi Çalışmalar (Diğer)

Journal:

Hitit İlahiyat Dergisi Vol.23 Issue 1, pp.538-578

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001322098

pISSN:

2757-6949

Turkish Islamic Literature

Karahanlı Turkish

Qur’an Translation

Present Participle

Object

Morphological Adjective

Adjectival Participle

Archaisms.Türk İslam Edebiyatı

Karahanlı Türkçesi

Kur’an Tercümesi

Fâil

Mef’ûl

Sıfat-ı Müşebbehe

Sıfat-fiil

Eskicillik.

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Bekir Sarıkaya

Publisher: Hitit University

Main Topics: Türk İslam Edebiyatı | Edebi Çalışmalar (Diğer)

Journal: Hitit İlahiyat Dergisi Vol.23 Issue 1, pp.538-578

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 6/2024

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001322098

pISSN: 2757-6949

Issues

Authors:

Bekir Sarıkaya

Publisher:

Hitit University

Main Topics:

Türk İslam Edebiyatı | Edebi Çalışmalar (Diğer)

Journal:

Hitit İlahiyat Dergisi Vol.23 Issue 1, pp.538-578

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

6/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001322098

pISSN:

2757-6949