Paltore Yktiyar

Al Farabi Kazakh National University /Kazakhstan

Abai Kunanbaev and his linguistic and stylistic norms, which are reflected in his prose treatises

Abai lived in the epoch of changes, which found its way in his doings and thoughts. Probably that particular time – the time of the turn of two centuries, influence of Russian and through it European culture, formed Abai as a poet and thinker, who left his significant mark in the history and culture of Kazakh nation.

In his oeuvre Abai largely used the language of Kazakh oral arts and oral & colloquial speech. Therefore one cannot oppose Abai’s language to nation-wide language. Each Abai’s line has an aura of national spirit. Vivid image-bearing word, apt turn of speech, phonetic accords, corresponding to standards and regularities of the nation-wide language such was the source, where Abai drew the means for his verses from.

Abai’s great historical mission consists as it were in disclosure of nation-wide language to public. He raised rich linguistic heritage of oral arts and folk & colloquial speech up to the level of literary language. It was conditioned by progressiveness, democratic nature of his artwork. Expressing thoughts and expectations of people, striking for cultural progress, for friendship with Russian people, fighting for social justice, great poet had to write only in nation-wide language, destroying and rejecting language canons of herald scribes of religious and political obscurantism.

From 1890 till 1898 he penciled down his ideas in prose, which afterwards took shape of 45 edifications to its nation.

“The Book of Words” (Kazakh: “Қара Сөз”) (prose treatises) is foundation of both publicistic and scientific (edificatory-narrative) styles, as well as narrative literature style, which got their further development and flourishing with subsequent Kazakh writers of post-Abai period. The poet laid down and developed his deep thoughts about different sides of life, philosophic and ethic problems sometimes in oral vernacular, sometimes in high rhetorical, sometimes in scientific-protreptic styles. In 1933 The Book of Words was published, where his philosophic thinkings regarding history, enlightenment, etc. were included.

By lexical composition these “words” somewhat differ from poesies. Here the author sometimes resorts to Koranic terms, bookish-literary forms and expressions: айтылмыш (talk): “... әлгі айтылмыш сөздерді бip үлкен қызық көріп, қуанып келуші едім” (Such talk rejoiced and entertained me) (word 2); Һәммә (wise): “Һәммә ғаламға белгілі данышпандар әлдеқашан байқаған әрбір жалқау кici қорқақ, қайратсыз тартады” (The wise of this world long ago observed: a sluggard is, as a rule, cowardly and weak-willed) (word 3); демеклік (craving): “Бipeyi – білсем екен демеклік, не көрсе соған талпынып...” (The other is a craving for knowledge. A baby will grasp at…) (word 7); нешік (word 9); ғибадат (word 10); нәфсі (word 17); хаким (word 19); ғанимат (word 20); дәріл харап, хикмет, дағуа (word 25); бәйіт (word 27); ғибратлану (word 31); ядкар, бәһра, кәмәләт, ғиззат, муслим, тәслим, хаят, басар, самиғ, ирада, кәләм, тәкуин, зәрра, мумкинат, хадис, кадим and other (word 38); зинһар (word 40); тағлим (word 41); жибли, кәсби хасил (word 43); тауарих, etc.

There are separate Arabic and Iranian whole constructions in “The Book of Words”: сифат-затия – peculiar to them themselves, әсма и хусна – noble names and so on (the most of them are in word 38: хауас сәлим – noble features, дәфғы музаррат – for the avoidance of evil, саллалаху ғалайхи уә саллам – may Allah bless Mohammad – the “Prophet” – Islam bearer, standard-bearer. By estimate of some philologists, the quantity of Arabic and Iranian words comes up to three hundred and odd. This figure shall not frighten us. First, almost a good half of them (more than 180 Arabic and Iranian words and constructions) is presented in word 38 (sporadically, of course, they have place in other works as well). Second, we shall not forget that Abai in most cases made use of these Arabic and Iranian elements barely for the purposes to reproduce Islamic-religious world outlook, and typical features of culture, household life patterns of a definite epoch. On the general background of Abai’s literary vocabulary these loanwords from Arabic and Iranian words and word combinations take trifling place.

We must not leave out of account two-way nature of these Eastern words. Their majority is assimilated to an extent that initial foreign phonetic pattern of loanwords became almost imperceptible or imperceptible at all. These are words like өмір, талап, дүние, қуат, дос, аспан, ілім, ар, намыс, тән, әділет, мән, мекен, сәлем, рас, әдеп, айла (life, insistence, world, joy, friend, sky, learning, honour, conscience, flesh, just, essence, abode, regards, really, courtesy, yard), et al. It is curious that Arabic and Iranian words in the initial pattern were used by the author in other stylistic nuances, than their assimilated parallels (ғиззат – іззет, нәфси – нәпсі, et al.).

The words, retaining initial phonetic shape, in Abai’s use constitute a small quantity. The second group of loanwords like: әзәли – origin, әбәди – perpetually, нәмиша – permanently, ниһаят – limit, тәбиғ – influencing, мәтбуғ falling within the influence (from word 38), et al. are synthetic loanwords, most of which could not come into lexical fund of post-Abai literary Kazakh language.

How to explain presence of separate before-Abai bookish forms in Abai’s prose talks? In our opinion, it could be explained by a total absence of narrative literary speech prior to Abai and Altynsarin.

Many talks were written in pure modern Kazakh language, observing nation-wide standards inherent in native speech. One can easily catch there the author’s active interference, so to say, in “inner” world of native language. Excellent knowledge of language nuances allowed him to create in the last quarter of the last century publicistic style of Kazakh literary language, comparing favourably with the standards of so-called “Shaghatai” or “Central Asian literary” language.

Abai’s talks richly present laconic expressions, cognitive aphorisms, meaningful sayings, proverbs, felicitous idioms, many of which are got involved not only in artistic context, but also as object of author’s philosophical and philological interpretation (see: 3nd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 10th, 13th, 15th, 29th, 37th, 39th edifying talks, where Abai’s interpretation of Kazakh proverbs and sayings is available).

By his edifying talks Abai introduced many stylistic, syntactical novelties, typical of literary publicistic language. Interestingly built rhetorical questions, original intonation and rhythmic devices of sentence creation, rethinking of word and syntagmatic combinations, masterfully used stable phraseological units, experienced speech, specifically built monologue – here is by far not a complete list of Abai introduced novelties. I cite examples of rhetorical questions. In this regard the word forty is especially typical, wholly built on repetition of words қалай - why? and несі – why so?: несі is repeated 6 times, and қалай - 17 times. Original interrogative intonation can be found in Abai’s words, which is formed not by interrogative words and forms, but by external intonation modulation of sentence parts. Compare: “Ел бағу? Жоқ, елге бағым жоқ... (Rule the people? No, the people are ungovernable). Мал бағу? Жоқ, баға алмаймын... (Shall I multiply the herds? No, I cannot do that). Ғылым бағу? Жоқ, ғылым бағарға да ғылым сөзін сөйлесер адам жоқ. Білгеніңді кімге үйретерсің, білмегеніңді кімнен сұрарсың? (Occupy myself with learning? But how shall I engage in scholarship when I have no one to exchange an intelligent word with? And then to whom shall I pass on the knowledge I will have amassed? Whom shall I ask what I do not know myself?). Софылық қылып, дін бағу? Жоқ, ол да болмайды, оған да тыныштық керек. Не көңілде, не көрген күніңде бір тыныштық жоқ, осы елге, осы жерде не қылған софылық? (Choose the path of the Sufi and dedicate myself to the service of religion? No, I'm afraid that won't do either. This vocation calls for serenity and complete peace of mind. But I have not known peace either in my soul or in my life – and what sort of piety can there be amongst these people, in this land!)

Abai frequently uses oral colloquial language standards, representative only of this style. In oral spoken language verb in participal form may be used also at the end of sentence, and author’s speech in the form of principal clause may precede subordinate clause. Compare: Мен бала күнімде ecmyші едім (In my childhood I used to hear) and further goes direct speech, which is closed by form деп (word 2), Ой, тәңірім-ай! Соны білмей тұрсың ба? Ол ана қулық қой, бұл мына қулық қой, деп (“Allah be with you,” the rogue will say obsequiously, “how couldn’t you think of such a simple thing?” And off he will go, suggesting vile tricks, one worse than the other) (word 13). The following sentences are constructed according to standards of oral speech: ...Мұның бәрі – жан құмары. Білсем екен, көрсем екен, үйренсем екен деген (word 7) – This is but the natural desire of the soul, the wish to see everything, hear everything and learn everything (P. 332). The same should be said in respect of sentence ...Қазақ ойлайды, бірлік am ортақ, ас ортақ, киім ортақ, дәулет ортақ болса екен» дейді (from word 6) – They think that unity resides in the common ownership of livestock, chattels and food.

Colloquial forms of this kind not the least bit violate the system of an excellent style, vice versa, they say about Abai’s large craving for nation-wide speech. He uses forms жарамасы үшін: “Бағанағы жақсы адам сайлауға жарамасы үшін... (And all this in order smear an honest person and bar him from high office…) (from word 3); білмек (from word 13); құтылмағы (from word 20); сезбекпен (from word 14); боларға керек (from word 12). These somewhat bookish forms look in Abai’s context as forms with specific stylistic designation, promoting enrichment of structural capabilities of literary language. There are rarely found separate unceremonious expressions, taken from Kazakh colloquial language (see word: 2, 9, 15, 22, 38).

All that, just as previous different examples, is given to illustrate Abai’s innovation, having fundamental significance for formation of new Kazakh literary language. Abai takes top pride of place in the history of Kazakh nation culture, in creation of Kazakh written literature, its linguistic and stylistic norms; he is a genuine creator of new Kazakh literary language.

Bibliography cited

1. Kunanbaev A. Complete works in two volumes. А., 1995. V.1-2 Abai Kunanbaev. Verses. Poems. Prose. M., 1954.

2. Abai and archives. A., 1995. p. 42.

3. Bukeikhanov A., Abai (Ibrahim) Kunanbaev. Obituary // Semipalatinsk sheet. 1905, 25 November.

4. Radlov V.V. Samples of folk literature of Turkic tribes, living in the Southern Siberia and Dzhungarian Steppe. Part 3. Kirghiz dialect. StP., 1870.

5. Melioranskiy P.M. Brief grammar of Kazakh-Kirghiz language: in 2 parts.

Part 1. StP., 1894; Part 2. StP., 1897.