THE PHONOSEMANTIC RESEARCH OF AZERBAIJANI AND TURKISH IN THE ASPECT OF LITERARY LANGUAGE AND DIALECT

Discovering and categorizing phonetic, morphological and lexical units related to different languages in any language, studying the factors and forms of language connections are still among trending issues nowadays. Special importance has been attached on dialect lexicon of languages, historical-comparative study of literary language and finding out various language elements in the paper. Some researchers support that as Turkic peoples have been formed as independent or semi-independent nations completing ethnosocial differentiation process since the late Middle Ages, their languages differ from one another to some extent. The emergence of different Turkic states has led to the appearance of common and various features in the peoples and their languages who experienced public-political differentiation. In this case if the existing analogical features are proof for the closeness of these languages, distinct features are indeed the confirmation of peculiar development direction of each language. The research work provides some vision about common and distinctive features of the Azerbaijani language dialects and the Turkish language. The characteristics of languages’ mutual influence are reflected in language material. KEYWORDS

ISSN 2518-167X 2(44), February 2020 31 features in the background of literary language or in dialectal background. Today we come across language features that are inherent to the Turkish literary language in the dialects of Azerbaijani. Common language characteristics are observed in both the Turkic languages' dialects. Discovering common language features in the direction of literary language and dialect is the case in point for preserving ancient historical linguistic features of Turkic languages. As a result of the comparison between two regions based on the dialect facts new ancient language facts have been found out.
The research conducted in the aspect of literary language and dialects is of great importance in the detection of the impact of interdialect processes that carry on in both the languages, and literary languages on dialect. Direction fields of the research are the following: Dialect and the research conducted in the background of dialect The dialects in the Azerbaijani language are compared with the Eastern dialects in Anatolia here. Similar phonetic, morphological features have been discovered in both the dialects during the research. This adequacy brings Anatolia's Eastern dialects closer to Azerbaijani dialects. The research has been carried out based on phonetic and morphological peculiarities discovered by L. Karahan in Anatolia's "East group dialect" classification and that are separated from Anatolia's North-East and West group of dialects. Considering the dialectological features crucial listed by the author, other dialectological research papers have also been reviewed in the research in the background of literary language and dialect. During the research it became certain that dialects in the regions Kars and Erzurum reflect the features of Azerbajani dialects more. And the reason behind it is the historical settlement of Azerbaijanis in these regions. "Today original settlement area of Kars Azeris is Surmali area that embraces Tuzluca, Igdir and Mediterranean districts. Most of the people living in these districts and villages are Azeri. The region where they are dense and crowded outside Surmali area is Arpacay district. Most villages of this district, especially Bashgedikler consist of Azeris. Furthermore, a good number of Azeris dwell in the center of Kars and in some villages that depend on the center" (Ercilasun, 1983:47). E. Gemalmaz noted that the dialects in the region Erzurum bear traces of Turkmen-Azeri-Terekeme dialects (Gemalmaz, 1995:22).

Dialect and the research conducted in the background of literary language
Phonetic, morphological and lexical features of Azerbaijani dialects have been comparatively studied with the Turkish literary language here.
Although the modern Turkic languages were formed from common Turkic roots, gradually there emerged some different characteristics in their phonetic, lexical and grammatical structures. Figuring out common and different features in related languages during the research of the separate Turkic languages enables us to comprehensively learn the specific features of the studied language.
East group dialects of Azerbaijan and Anatolia: Anatolia's East group dialects comply with Azerbaijani dialects and dialects of Iraq Turkmens' South and South-East group dialects in terms of language features. According to the classification by M. Shiraliyev, dialects of Kars Azeris that live in the East in Surmali area that covers the regions Tuzluca, Igdir, Mediterranean, in Arpacay and partially in the center of Kars comply with South group dialects (Nakhchivan, Ordubad, Erevan) of Azerbaijani (Karahan, 2011:54). Iraq-Turkmen dialect also complies with South group dialects of Azerbaijani (Iraq-Turkmen dialect 2004: 44).
M. Shiraliyev considers dialects of Kars Terekemes living in Cildir, Arpacay, Susuz, Selim and in the center of Kars close to the West group (Gazakh, Ayrum-Borchaly) of that classification (Karahan, 2011:54). Terekemes that came to Kars are "Cildir terekemes" who are mostly called "Karakalpak" today. They used to live in the regions Borchaly and Gazakh that depended on Gazakh-Shamsaddin khanate in North Azerbaijan, at the time Turkmenchay contract was signed in 1828 they abandoned their birthplaces and came to Kars and settled down in the villages of Cildir and Ardahan. Some of them moved to Iran, most of them are living in the regions Gazakh, Tovuz and Aghstafa in Gazakh (Ercilasun, 1983:44). Azerbaijanis migrated from their ancient Oghuz land in various years. And also after Kars contract was signed (in 1921, October 13) Karapapaks who didn't want to stay in the territory of newly established Armenia and in the subordination of Armenians and who lived in the villages Mumukhan, Siniq, Tezbahar, Arpa, Boyuk Shishtapa, Kichik Shishtapa, Sultanabad, Soyudlu, Mustuqlu, Bahceli, Seldaghilan, Kichik Tapakoy, Khancalli, Bozgala, Ordaklu, Gonchali, Tezekoy as well as Akbaba migrated to Turkey protesting the bordering and never came back. Currently in Kars, Erzurum, Cildir, Ardahan, Sarykamysh, Igdir and some other places thousands of Akbaba people are living (Bayramov, Bayramova, 2014:17-19). A. B. Ercilasun calls dialects of Kars region "the circle connecting Azerbaijan with Turkey" in terms of ethnic and dialectic factors. He notes that one end of this circle extends to Erzurum, Coruh and Central Anatolia, and the other end extends to Baku, Nakhchivan, Erevan, Akhbaba, Akhalkalaki, Tbilisi, Gazakh, Borchaly and Akiska (Ercilasun, 1983:145).
M. Ergin highlights: "Oral language of East Anatolia is Azeri, written language is natural Turkish. The features and influence of Azerbaijani are felt beginning from Kars to Samsun-Sivas-Iskenderun line and sometimes to the inner parts of Central Anatolia. However, this influence weakens gradually from East to West. Kars province is where the usage of Azerbaijani dominates in Anatolia" (Ergin, 1971:9).
Today the reason behind the closeness between East Anatolia dialects and the Azerbaijani language is the Azerbaijanis who once migrated here: "Most of them spread into some villages as well as small towns. Therefore, Kars province has rich folklore of dialects which is unimaginably diverse" (Jafaroglu, 1995:12;296). The dialects of Terekemes living in the areas Cildir, Susuz, Selim areas in Kars and in the villages dependent on the center of Kars; the dialects of Azerbaijanis living in the villages Tuzluca, Igdir, Mediterranean located in Surmali and in the villages dependent on Arpacay and Kars center differ from the dialect features of East group of Anatolia (Karahan, 2011:55). L.Karahan divides East dialects of Anatolia that are different in terms of phonetics and grammar into groups and calls these groups "sub-branches". The author's classification is like this: Group I: Agri, Van As it is obvious, the role of the public-political processes that the history established is undeniable in the emergence of dialects. "The emergence of dialects is not an issue of today, dialect is a historical category" (Azizov, 2016:291).
The researches conducted show that the same language fact can be related to both literary language and dialect. During the comparison of language facts hopeless situation appears in several cases, the samples involved in the study bring about questions. Thus, it becomes possible to determine which of the words belong to literary language or dialect as a result of historical-comparative research. During the comparison of East-Anatolia dialects with Azerbaijani dialects in terms of language features relevant language features have been taken into account in the mentioned sub-branches. This coherence indicates itself in phonetic changes, usage of suffixes and in lexical direction. Some phonetic, grammatical and lexical features that belong to ancient layers of a language leave literary language in certain periods and are antiquated, but these forms are maintained in everyday folk dialects.
12. Studied past tense suffix is "-mış, -miş" in most dialects of East group. "-ıp/-ip" that is past tense suffix and is currently used in Azerbaijani and Iraq Turkmen dialects are used in Bulanik, Ahlat, Adilcevaz and Van dialects. Ahlat is the border of this suffix. Past tense suffix used in Mush and Bitlis is "-miş". (Karahan, 2011:73).

Semantic similarity of Azerbaijani and Turkish
A sign that is dialect feature in Azerbaijani is considered a literary language feature in Turkish. In some cases we observe the opposite.
The words bildir «last year», sancaq «different-sized and formed woman accessory made of plain or valuable metal to pin to breast or hair» that are used in the Azerbaijani literary language aren't used in the Turkish literary language. But these are encountered in Turkish dialects: the word bildir means «last year» in Afyon, Bolu, Kars, Adana dialects (Compilation Dictionary. Vol: 2. http://tdkterim.gov.tr/ Dictionary of Turkish Dialects); the word sancaq means «different-sized and formed woman accessory made of plain or valuable metal to pin to hair» in Kars dialect: İkiüç sancah al, başıma sancajam (Compilation Dictionary. Vol: 10. http://tdkterim.gov.tr/ Dictionary of Turkish Dialects).
Conclusions. Comparative research of Azerbaijani and Turkish in the background of dialects and literary language enables us to determine similar or different phonosemantic features between these 2(44), February 2020 languages. We can conclude that the determined phonetic, morphological and lexical similarity in language materials are closely due to the reasons that those languages have been fed from the same root and existed in historically close periods. It's undeniable that both the languages have common language characteristics. One of the main reasons behind this is the migration of Azerbaijanis from their ancient lands. The most undeniable historical fact is the ethnic familiarity of the people speaking in these languages.
During the research of Turkic languages revealing common and different features in related languages provides a good opportunity to learn the specific features of the studied language in detail. Some phonetic, grammatical and lexical features that belong to ancient layers of a language leave literary language in certain periods and are antiquated, but these forms are maintained in everyday folk dialects. Two related languages that share the same geography historically embarking on a path of development on their own led to the emergence of tangible differences between these languages. As a conclusion we can say that though Azerbaijani and Turkish are close due to phonetic, lexical and grammatical features among Turkic languages, there exist different phonetic, morphological and lexical peculiarities alongside with respective language elements. A sign that is a dialect feature in Azerbaijani is considered a literary language feature in Turkish and vice versa. In our opinion, approaching the semantics of words in general context is more advisable. It's very difficult to determine the exact history of mutual influence opportunities of Turkic languages based on dialect carriers. Thus, comparison of two related languages based on language materials indicates the closeness of these languages on dialectal level.