The ambiguity of the somatism "hand" in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages

Bilyalova Surie Seranovna Senior Lecturer of the Department of Crimean Tatar and Turkish Language Studies at Crimean University of Engineering and Teaching 295000, Russia, respublika Krym, g. Simferopol', per. Uchebnyi, 8 aliasi0911@ukr.net Other publications by this author

The vocabulary of any language is a dynamic phenomenon. New lexemes are actively formed not only morphologically, but also semantically. As a result of semantic derivation, words acquire new meanings, which are formed on the basis of similarity of appearance, color, feature, functions performed, as well as as a result of other associations. Semantic derivation is also characteristic of somatisms, the polysemy of which is a consequence of the principle of anthropomorphism. According to this principle, when describing objective reality, a person, nominating an object, first of all refers to his body, that is, names objects based on external and functional similarities with various parts of the body.

Various aspects of multivalued somatisms have been the subject of research in various languages. Among them, one can note the works of such linguists as T. M. Aliyev "Polysemantism of somatic vocabulary in multi-system languages" ^[3], M. N. Jadeiko "Anthropolinguistic aspects of the polysemy of somatisms" ^[6], R. Yu. Mugu "Polysemantism of somatic vocabulary (based on the material of Russian and German languages) ^[12]. In the Crimean Tatar language, somatisms were considered at the level of phraseological activity: Z. Mamutova "Grammatical and semantic characteristics of Crimean Tatar phraseological units with the bash 'head' component" ^[10], A.M. Kurtseitov "The role of somatisms in Crimean Tatar phraseology" ^[8], A.M. Emirova "Fundamentals of Crimean Tatar phraseology" ^[13]. Somatisms were studied on the basis of the Turkish language in the following works: R. Akalyn "Similarities of somatisms in the Kyrgyz and Turkish languages" ^[1], V. M. Lemskaya "Specifics of phraseological units of the Russian and Turkish languages: towards the formulation of the problem" ^[9], etc. However, there has not been a separate comparative study devoted to the polysemy of the somatic vocabulary of the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages to date.

The purpose of the article is to study the "hand" somatism in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages, analyze the semantic structures of polysemants and identify similarities and differences. The semantic structures of the somatisms "kyol", "el" ("hand"), "avuch" ("palm"), "parmak" ("finger"), "tyrnak" ("nail"), "tirsek" ("elbow"), "bilek" ("wrist").

In the Crimean Tatar language, one of the two upper limbs of a person is designated by the synonymous, however, in some meanings semantically different somatisms "kyol" and "el" ("hand, palm"). The token "kyol", more often used in the meaning of "hand", has the following meanings:1. One of the two upper limbs of a person from the shoulder to the fingertips, as well as from the wrist to the fingertips: Shu kol kimninki olgany anlaganje, manlayyna suvuk pyshtavyn demiri tokunda. – While he was sorting out whose hand it was, the cold iron of a gun was put to his forehead ^{[5, p. 18]};2. Handwriting, style: oglannyn kyolu tyuzgyun – the boy's handwriting is smooth [author's example]; 3. The left or right part of something or someone: sol kyol - the left side, sag kyol - the right side ^{[7, p. 126]}; 4. A water object that joins even larger objects (for example, the mouth of a river): ozen kjolu is a tributary of the river ^{[7, p. 126]}. E. V. Sevortyan in his etymological study also indicates the lexico–semantic variant "hand from shoulder to hand" as the main meaning ^{[15, p. 42]}. 2, 3 and 4 lexico-semantic variants (further LSV) come from the first LSV as a result of associations with the hand as an active organ. According to the linguist, the second meaning of "handwriting" and the third meaning of "side" are "derived" from the meaning of "active part of the hand". The fourth meaning "a water object attached to even larger objects" appeared on the principle of anthropomorphism, just as the hand is attached to the body ^{[15, p. 38]}. All derived values of the polysemant "kjol" with the main value are radially connected, that is, all go back to the main LSV. The transfer of meaning from the main to derivatives is mainly carried out as a result of metaphorical transfer based on the external and functional similarity of features.

The semantic structure of the somatism "el", which is also found in the meaning of "palm", is represented by the following lexical and semantic variants: 1. One of the two upper limbs of a person from the shoulder to the fingertips, as well as from the wrist to the fingertips;Seitbekirnin elinde diplomatimyndan bashkya yukyu ek. – Seitbekir had nothing in his hands but a briefcase. ^{[2, p. 3]};2. Palm: el chirpmak – clap your hands ^{[7, p. 332]}: 3. Property:Elimdeki butyun paramny bu evge masraf ettim. – Everything I had, I invested in this house [author's example]; 4. The means:Vesikalarny agamnyn elinen yelladym. – I sent the documents with the help of my brother [example of the author]. It should be noted in the synonymous series "kyol – el" in the sphere of use, the lexeme "kyol" is dominant and in some of its meanings can be interchanged with the lexeme "el" (kyolundan (elinden) tutmak – holding hands), however, in such meanings as "ozen kyolu" ("mouth of the river" (used only The lexeme "kyol". E. V. Sevortyan notes that the interchangeability of the lexemes "kyol" and "el", which was preserved only in the first LSV, is due to the influence of Mongolian languages on the Turkic languages at one time, in which "a similar opposition is inherently absent" ^{[15, p. 37]}. Both polysemants actively participate in phraseological constructions. For example, "k'ol": "k'ol tutmak" ("to support"), "k'olga alyshmak" ("to become tame"), "el": "elge alyshmak" ("to become tame"), "el ishi" ("handmade"), "el kavushtyryp oturmak" ("sit back"), etc. As a result of the analysis of the semantic structure of the lexeme "el", it was revealed that secondary LSV are associated with the main meaning by a radial connection, based on metaphorical and metonymic transfers. In Turkish, both the "kol" and the "el" lexeme are also used. Unlike the semantic structure in the Crimean Tatar language, in which a hierarchy consisting of 4 LSV was indicated, in the Turkish language the polysemant "kol" has a broader semantic structure and has 12 LSV: 1. Part of the human body from the shoulder to the fingertips: Kol uma iki diki? at?ld?. – Two stitches were put on my arm [author's example]; 2. The upper part of the front legs of some animals (sheep, calf, etc.): koyunun kol u – the front legs of a sheep [author's example]; 3. The part of clothing covering the upper limbs: K?z g?zlerinin yan? pembe mantosunun kol lar?na siliyordu. –The girl wiped her tears on the sleeves of her pink cape [author's example]; 4. Thick branches coming from the trunk of a tree: tere?in kol u – a branch of a tree; 5. A metal or wooden handle in the device of machines designed for turning or pulling: makina kol u – the lever of the machine; 6. Part of some musical instruments, designed to hold; 7. Part of a sofa, an armchair, designed to support hands: koltu?un kol u – the armrest of the chair [author's example]; 8. A branching part of something: T?rk Dil Kurumunun bilim ve uygulama kollar?. –Department of Theory and Practice of the Turkish Language Institute ^{[19, p. 1341]}; 9. Security Service, Police, etc.: L?k?n b?yle kardan yollar?n ?t?ld bu gecede, kol dan korku yoktu. –However, that night, when the roads were covered with snow, we were under the protection of the security service ^{[19, p. 1341]}; 10. Working collective, group: ke?if kolu – intelligence group [author's example]; 11. Side: sa? kol – right side, sol kol – left side ^{[19, p. 1341]}; 12. Mode, device, formation: y?r?y kol u – walking mode ^{[19, p. 1341]}.

Somatism "el" in Turkish has the following LSV: 1. The part of the hand from the wrist to the fingertips, designed to hold objects and many other functions: Bekir Enver'?n geni?, sa?lam omuzlar?na, ertek el lerine bakt?... –Bekir looked at Enver's broad, strong shoulders, male hands ^{[17, p. 12]}; 2. Remedy, method: Karde?imin el iyle arkadama mekt?p yollad?m. – I sent a letter to a friend with the help of my brother ^{[18, p. 687]}; 3. Property, property: El imdeki b?t?n paray? bu eve yat?rd?m. – Everything I had, I invested in this house ^{[18, p. 687]}; 4. Move in card games: imdi el bende. – Now it's my turn ^{[18, p. 687]}; 5. Part of some items intended for holding; handle:kap? el i – door handle [author's example]; 6. Control, influence: Topraklar du?man el?nden kurtar?ld?. – The lands are liberated from the enemy's hand [example of the author]; 7. Something made by hand, by hand: el sanat – handmade [example of the author]. The LSV of the polysemant "el" are interconnected by a radial-catenal type of connection. So 2, 3, 4 and 5 LSV ascend to the main 1 LSV, 6 and 7 LSV successively ascend to 5 LSV. 2, 3, 4 LSV are formed as a result of metonymic transfer of meaning, 5, 6, 7 LSV are formed as a result of functional transfer of meaning, that is, they rely on similarity with the hand, as with an active human organ.

Despite the fact that the Turkish language is part of the Western Oguz subgroup of the Turkic languages, both lexemes nominating the upper limb of the human body are actively used in speech. It should be noted that, unlike the Crimean Tatar language, in the Turkish language, the polysemant "el" does not mean the entire upper limb, but only a part from the wrist to the fingertips. Consequently, in the Turkish language, the lexemes "el" and "kol" in the main meaning are not synonymous with a doublet.

The phenomenon of polysemy is also characteristic of other somatisms nominating various parts of the hand, such as "avuch" – "avu?" ("palm"), "bilek" – "bilek" ("wrist"), "tirsek" – "dirsek" ("elbow"), "parmak" – "parmak"("finger"), "tarnak" – "t?rnak" ("nail").

So the somatism "avuch" ("palm") in the Crimean Tatar language is also polysemous. In the lexicographic study of S. M. Useinov , the dictionary definition of this lexeme is represented by two meanings: 1. Palm; 2. A handful of something ^[7]. However, as a result of the component analysis of values, the semantic structure of this somatism can be represented as follows: 1. The inside of the arm:Kadyn avuchyny kyashydy. – A woman scratched her palm [author's example]; 2. The hand is in a semi-closed state:Kartlar avuchlaryny achyp, dua ete ediler. – Old men, opening their palms, prayed [author's example]; 3. The amount of something that can fit in a half-closed hand: bir avuch fyndyk – one handful of hazelnuts [author's example]. Thus, the initial meaning of the semantic structure of the studied somatism is "the inner part of the hand", 2 LSV is formed by associations with the functions performed, 3 LSV is a metonymic transfer of meaning. All lexico-semantic variants of the lexeme "avuch" are interconnected by a catenal type of connection. In the Turkish language, the somatism "avu?" has the following semantic structure: 1. The inside of the hand: avcu nu kad? – scratched the palm [author's example]; 2. Hand in a semi-closed state: Bu?day? avcu ile ald?. – He scooped wheat with his palm ^{[18, p. 165]}; 3. The amount of something that can fit in a half-closed hand:bir avu? pirin? - one handful of rice ^{[18, p. 165]}. The analysis shows that the semantic structures of the somatism "palm" in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages are completely identical.

The semantic structure of somatism "parmak" ("finger") in the Crimean Tatar language has the following meanings: 1. One of the separated movable limbs of the hand or foot:Kimerde bir parmagynen beyaz, inje kozlyugini tyuzetip ala. – Sometimes corrects white, thin glasses with one finger ^{[4, p. 37]}; 2. Something with the size of the finger width: eki parmak k'adar - two fingers wide [author's example]; 3. The amount captured by the finger when immersed in someor a thick mass: bir parmak bal – one finger of honey [author's example]; 4. Attitude to any case: bu ishte ony parmagy bar - he is involved in this case ^{[7, p. 193]}; 5. (construction term) a post (railing); 6. One twenty-fourth part of an arshin. The analysis shows that 2 and 4 LSV go back to the main meaning and are formed as a result of metaphorical transfer. So 2 the value is formed on the basis of an association with the size of the finger, that is, it implies something about the same width as a person's finger. 4 LSV is formed as a result of similarity with any positive or, most often, negative qualities of a person. In turn, 3 LSV goes back to 2 LSV and is due to the metonymic transfer of meaning. This value is formed as a result of adjacency, that is, it means the amount that a finger can capture when immersed in any mass. 6 LSV also goes back to 2 LSV, however, this value implies an external similarity with the size of the finger and, therefore, is formed as a result of metaphorical transfer. 5 LSV goes back to 1 LSV and is formed as a result of metaphorical transfer based on external similarity. So the columns, for example railings, branch off parallel to each other from the common crossbar, as well as the fingers from the palm. Lexico-semantic variants of the somatism "finger" in the Crimean Tatar language are interconnected by a radial-catenal type of connection. In the Turkish language, the semantic structure of the somatism "parmak" ("finger") can be represented as follows: 1. The extreme part of the upper and lower limbs of man and some animals, mobile and separated from each other: f?t Levi, i?lerinde Bekir'i g?r?nce tombul parmak lar?yla seyrek sakal?n? kad?... – Seeing Bekir among them, the Jew Levi scratched his sparse beard with thick fingers ^{[17, p. 160]}; 2. Each of the spokes or the wheel rods connecting the center and rim of the wheel: Tekerli?in parmak lar? k?r?ld? – The spokes of the wheel broke ^{[19, p. 1769]}; 3. The English measure of length, which is 1/12 feet; 4. The measure of length, which is 1/24 yards; 5. Something with the size of the width of the finger: De?ne?i iki parmak k?saltmal? – The stick should be reduced by two fingers ^{[19, p. 1769]}; 6. The amount captured by the finger when immersed in any thick mass:bir parmak bal – one finger of honey [author's example]; 7. Relation to any case: bu i?te onun parma var – he is involved in this case [author's example]. 2 LSV is connected with 1 LSV and is formed as a result of metaphorical transfer based on external similarity. 3, 4, 5, 6 LSV are connected to each other catenally and go back to 1 LSV. These values are formed by metonymic transfer of values. 7 LSV goes back to 1 LSV and is formed as a result of metaphorical transference. As it becomes clear from the analysis, all the values of the polysemant are interconnected by a radial-catenal type of connection. Thus, the semantic structure of the somatism "finger" in the Crimean Tatar language contains 6 LSV, in Turkish – 7 LSV. It is revealed that the main meaning in the Crimean Tatar language is similar to the main meaning of this lexeme in the Turkish language. 2, 3 and 4 LSV in the Crimean Tatar language are identical, respectively, with 5, 6 and 7 LSV in Turkish, 6 meaning corresponds to 4 meaning of somatism. 3 LSV of the semantic structure of somatism "finger" in the Turkish language is absent in the Crimean Tatar language, however, perhaps this is a consequence of the dynamics of the language, and it has been lost over time. From this position it follows that the semantic structure of the somatism "finger" in both languages has almost the same composition of LSV.

Consider the polysemy of somatism "nail" in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages. Thus, in the Crimean Tatar language, the somatism "tyrnak" ("nail") has the following lexical and semantic variants: 1. The horny coating on the back of the fingers of the upper and lower extremities in humans and many vertebrates: Oh, tyrnaklarynen buzlu kayanyn koksune yapyshty. – He clung to the icy surface of the rock with his fingernails ^{[5, p. 28.]}; 2. Quotes: tarnaklargaa almak – put in quotes [author's example];3. A device for climbing poles when repairing power lines; montersky manholes: electrician tyrnaklaryny takty – electrician put on his montersky manholes [author's example]; 4. Harrow. Secondary LSV ascend to the main LSV and are radially interconnected. 2 LSV appeared as a result of metaphorical transfer of meaning, which is based on the external similarity of quotation marks and nails. 3 and 4 LSV are due to functional similarity and are also a metaphorical transfer of meanings. In the Turkish language, the somatism "t?rnak" ("nail") has a semantic structure consisting of 7 LSV: 1. The horny coating on the back of the fingers of the upper and lower extremities in humans and many vertebrates: Zarf?n ucunu t?rnamla y?rtt?m. – I tore the edge of the envelope with my fingernail ^{[19, p. 2220]}; 2. The sinuous ends of some hook–like tools: kanca t?rna – the tip of the hook [author's example]; 3. The sharp part at the end of the anchor: gemi demirin t?rna - the hook of the anchor ^{[19, p. 2220]}; 4. The ribbon-like edge of the book, binding the individual sheets in: kitab?n t?rna sar?yd? – the tape binding the pages of the book was yellow [author's example]; 5. In the sculpture, each of the teeth designed to fasten the parts into a whole; 6. A tinker's tool designed to pierce iron; 7. Quotation marks: t ? rnak i ? inde verilen s ? zc ? k is a word given in quotation marks [author's example]. All LSV of the polysemant are radially connected to the original value. 2 and 3 LSV are formed as a result of external similarity by metaphorical similarity. 4 LSV goes back to 1 LSV as a result of functional similarity, that is, as nails perform a grasping function, so the tape collects the pages of the book into one. Similarly, it is connected with the main value of 5 LSV. 6 LSV is also formed by functional transfer, however, here we mean the piercing function. Thus, in both Crimean Tatar and Turkish, secondary meanings are radially connected with the main one and are formed by metaphorical as well as functional transfer.

Also, the catenal type of connection connects the LSV of the semantic structure of the polysemant "wrist" in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages. The analysis showed that the semantic structure of the polysemant "bilek" ("wrist") in the Crimean Tatar language has 2 meanings: 1. Wrist: bilegimini agyrtym – my wrist ached;2. The lower part of the sleeve: bileklerini katlady – rolled up the sleeves. The secondary meaning of a polysemous word is formed as a result of semantic derivation based on metonymic transfer of meanings. In Turkish, the somaticism "bilek" ("wrist") It also has 2 LSV: 1. The part of the body connecting the palm and the upper part of the arm: Sonra bile? ini avucunun i?ine alarak nabz?n? say?yorum. – Then, clasping my wrist with my palm, I begin to count the pulse ^{[18, p. 292]}; 2. Strength, power. The original meaning of the somatism "wrist" in the Crimean Tatar language is identical with the original meaning in the Turkish language. However, the semantic structures of this somatism differ in secondary meaning. According to E. V. Sevortyan, in some dialects of the Turkish language, the somatism "bilek" is also used in figurative meanings "the narrowed part of the paddle" and "the iron ring connecting the shaft with the scythe". There are no such meanings in the Crimean Tatar language. The author indicates the meaning of "wrist" as the main meaning of the overwhelming number of Turkic languages, including Turkish and Crimean Tatar, and also lists the following secondary meanings: "hand", "part of the arm from the elbow joint to the hand", "forearm", "hand" (for example, in some dialects of Kumyk and Uighur languages), "the lower part of the sleeve", "muscle, muscle", "spokes of the wheel", "stem (ear, etc.)" ^{[14, p. 145]}. At the same time, E. V. Sevortyan notes that the meaning of "hand" is inherent in both the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages. However, due to the absence of such a value today, it can be concluded that this drug may be outdated.

The somatism "elbow" is also ambiguous. Thus, in the Crimean Tatar language, the polysemant "tirsek" ("elbow") has 3 LSV: 1. The joint connecting the shoulder and forearm: tirseg imni urdym – hit with the elbow [author's example]; 2. Knee, link (in technique): borunin tirseg i – pipe knee [author's example]; 3. Arc–shaped river turn: ozennin tirseg i - river turn [author's example]. As a result of component analysis, it becomes clear that 2 and 3 LSV are radially connected to the original value and are formed by metaphorical transfer based on external similarity to the elbow. Unlike the semantic structure of the polysemant "elbow" in the Crimean Tatar language, in the Turkish language the somatism "dirsek" has 5 LSV: 1. The joint connecting the shoulder and forearm: k?z dirse? ini s?y?rd? – the girl scratched the elbow [author's example]; 2. Angle: Ama dirse? i ge?ince art?k kendini k?y?nde hissetti. –But, having passed the corner, he felt already at home ^{[17, p. 8]}; 3. The part of the sleeve fitting the elbow: elbisenin dirse? i y?rt?ld? – the dress was torn at the elbow [author's example]; 4. The knee connecting the pipes at the bend: iki boru bir dirsek le ba?lanm –two pipes are connected by one knee [example of the author]; 5. Backup: oturdu?u koltu?un dirse? i – backup of the chair in which he sits [example of the author]. 2, 4 and 5 LSV of somatism go back to 1 LSV as a result of external similarity, therefore, by metaphorical transfer. 3 LSV is the result of metonymic transfer and is formed on the basis of adjacency of values. The secondary values are radially related to the original one.

Thus, a comparative analysis of the "hand" somatism in the Crimean Tatar and Turkish languages revealed a number of similarities in the semantic structure of multivalued somatisms. The lexical and semantic composition of polysemants is largely identical, in almost all cases the original meanings in both languages coincide, the secondary meanings are also largely similar, however, there are some differences. In the languages considered, secondary meanings are formed by metaphorical, metonymic and functional transfers, which are due to the similarity of appearance, color, quality, functions, etc. The meanings formed as a result of semantic derivation are interconnected by radial, catenal and radial-catenal types of connections.