Hubbry Logo
Common Turkic languagesCommon Turkic languagesMain
Open search
Common Turkic languages
Community hub
Common Turkic languages
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Common Turkic languages
Common Turkic languages
Common Turkic languages
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Common Turkic
Shaz Turkic
Geographic
distribution		Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, North Asia, East Asia
Linguistic classificationTurkic
  • Common Turkic
Subdivisions
Language codes
Glottologcomm1245
Map of the distribution of Common Turkic Languages across Eurasia

Common Turkic, or Shaz Turkic, is a taxon in some classifications of the Turkic languages that includes all of them except the Oghuric languages which had diverged earlier.

Classification

[edit]

Lars Johanson's proposal contains the following subgroups:[1][2]

In that classification scheme, Common Turkic is opposed to the Oghuric languages (Lir-Turkic). The Common Turkic languages are characterized by sound correspondences such as Common Turkic š versus Oghuric l and Common Turkic z versus Oghuric r.

Siberian Turkic is split into a "Central Siberian Turkic" and "North Siberian Turkic" branch within the classification presented in Glottolog v4.8.[3]

In other classification schemes (such as those of Alexander Samoylovich and Nikolay Baskakov), the internal classification is different.[4][5]

References

[edit]

Literature

[edit]
  • Johanson, Lars & Éva Agnes Csató (ed.). 1998. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-08200-5.
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Common Turkic languages

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Common Turkic languages, also referred to as Shaz Turkic, form the primary branch of the , comprising all extant and historical Turkic languages except those in the divergent Oghuric (or Bulgharic) subgroup, such as Chuvash and the extinct Bulgar varieties. This branch is defined by its shared phonological developments, including the retention of Proto-Turkic *z in certain positions (hence "Shaz"), in contrast to the Oghuric *r/z alternation. Spoken by approximately 200 million people worldwide as of 2023, the Common Turkic languages represent the vast majority of the Turkic family's speakers, with accounting for only a small fraction (primarily around 1.1 million for Chuvash). They are distributed across a vast Eurasian expanse, from northeastern (e.g., Yakut/Sakha) and the in the east, through and the , to , the , and even pockets in like and . Major languages include Turkish (over 85 million speakers as of 2023, primarily in ), Uzbek (around 35 million as of 2023, in and neighboring regions), Kazakh (about 15 million as of 2023, in ), Azerbaijani (over 30 million as of 2023, in and ), and Uyghur (around 11 million as of 2023, mainly in , ), alongside smaller ones like Turkmen, Kyrgyz, Tatar, and various Siberian varieties such as Tuvan and . Linguistically, Common Turkic languages are typologically uniform, featuring agglutinative morphology where grammatical elements are added as suffixes to roots to form words, vowel harmony (a phonological rule requiring vowels within a word to share certain features like front/back or rounded/unrounded quality), and a canonical subject-object-verb (SOV) word order. These shared traits, along with high lexical similarity (often 80-90% cognate basic vocabulary among subgroups), enable partial mutual intelligibility, particularly within closely related branches like Oghuz (e.g., Turkish, Azerbaijani) or Kipchak (e.g., Kazakh, Tatar). The family is traditionally subdivided into four main subgroups—Oghuz (Southwestern), Kipchak (Northwestern), Karluk-Chagatai (Southeastern), and Siberian (Northeastern)—though the monophyly of the Siberian group remains debated in phylogenetic studies. Originating from a Common Turkic proto-language around 2,100 years ago (circa 66 BCE), these languages have evolved amid nomadic migrations, imperial expansions (e.g., Ottoman, Mongol), and contacts with Indo-European, Mongolic, and Uralic families, influencing their scripts (from runes to Arabic, Cyrillic, and Latin) and sociolinguistic status today.

Overview

Definition

The Common Turkic languages constitute the primary branch of the , encompassing all contemporary Turkic languages except those of the Oghuric (or Bulgharic) branch, such as Chuvash. This branch descends from Proto-Common Turkic, an intermediate stage following the divergence of Oghuric from Proto-Turkic around the 1st millennium BCE, and includes major subgroups like Oghuz, Kipchak, Karluk, and Siberian Turkic. Recognized as a valid linguistic grouping in standard classifications, Common Turkic bears the code comm1245, while the broader Turkic family is designated under ISO 639-5 as trk. What unifies the Common Turkic languages are shared innovations in phonology and vocabulary that distinguish them from Oghuric varieties. Phonologically, these include the development of /z/ (zetacism) and /š/ from earlier Proto-Turkic affricates, in contrast to the rhotacism (/r/) and lambdacism (/l/) characteristic of Oghuric; for example, the word for "winter" is *qïš in Common Turkic but *xĕl in Chuvash. Vocabularly, Common Turkic languages share a core lexicon derived from Proto-Common Turkic, including basic terms like *toquz "nine" (versus Chuvash *tăχăr), reflecting innovations absent in the western Oghuric branch. These features underscore the relatively shallow time depth of Common Turkic divergence, estimated at around 2,000 years before present. The term "Common Turkic" also evokes "Shaz Turkic," an alternative designation highlighting its status as the core or eastern varieties of Turkic, named after the phonological *šaz for "autumn" (from Proto-Turkic *čaγun), as opposed to the "Lir-Turkic" label for Oghuric based on *. This etymological framing emphasizes the historical and linguistic centrality of Common Turkic within the family, spoken today by over 180 million people across .

Distinction from other Turkic languages

The is divided into two primary branches through comparative linguistic analysis: the Oghuric (also known as Bulgharic) branch and the Common Turkic branch, with the split occurring approximately 2,000 years ago around the . This early divergence is inferred from phylogenetic modeling of lexical data across Turkic varieties, placing the root of the family at around 66 BC with a credibility interval spanning 755 BC to 483 AD. The separation likely took place in the eastern Eurasian steppes, after which Oghuric speakers migrated westward during the Hunnic and post-Hunnic periods in the 4th–5th centuries AD. A hallmark of this distinction lies in systematic phonological shifts unique to each branch. In , Proto-Turkic palatal sounds developed into r and l, contrasting with Common Turkic z and , a phenomenon known as and lambdacism, respectively. For instance, the Proto-Turkic form underlying 'eight' yields Chuvash sakə̂r but Common Turkic sekiz; similarly, 'four' corresponds to Chuvash tə̂ovatə̂ versus Common Turkic tȫrt. also exhibit palatalization of Proto-Turkic t and d to č before high front vowels (i, ï), and s to in certain positions, features not paralleled in Common Turkic. These innovations, preserved in Oghuric due to early isolation, sharply differentiate it from the sound systems of Common Turkic languages spoken across , , and parts of and the . The Oghuric branch is represented today solely by Chuvash, spoken by about 1 million people in the Volga-Kama region of , while its other members, such as Bulgar, are extinct. Extinct Bulgar varieties were once used in the kingdom (7th–13th centuries AD) and among Danube Bulgars before their Slavicization. This branch's geographic isolation in Eastern and Southern , far from the core Common Turkic territories, contributed to its distinct evolution, with limited ongoing contact reinforcing the phonological and lexical gaps. Supporting evidence for the early separation comes from historical inscriptions and patterns. Volga Bulghar inscriptions from the 13th–14th centuries, written in , display Chuvash-like phonological traits, such as , absent in contemporaneous Common Turkic runic texts like the . Additionally, Oghuric s in neighboring languages like Hungarian, Old Russian, and (e.g., Chuvash šurə̂ 'white' reflected in Khazar place names like Šarkel) preserve Oghuric-specific forms, indicating interactions predating the full divergence of Common Turkic subgroups and highlighting the branch's westward migration and isolation.

Historical Development

Proto-Common Turkic

Proto-Common Turkic (PCT) is the reconstructed ancestor of the Common Turkic , a major of the Turkic family excluding the , obtained through the applied to attested texts and modern daughter languages. This reconstruction posits PCT as spoken approximately from 500 BCE to 500 CE in , likely in the region encompassing the , , and , where early Turkic-speaking nomadic groups are archaeologically and linguistically attested, though the exact timing of the split from Oghuric remains debated, possibly in the BCE. The phonological inventory of PCT featured vowel harmony, a system where vowels in suffixes and affixes assimilate to the frontness or backness of the root vowels, influencing the overall harmony classes of words. PCT is reconstructed with nine vowels: /a/, /e/, /ə/, /i/, /o/, /ö/, /u/, /ü/, /ı/, distributed across front and back series with distinctions in height and rounding, though some reductions and mergers occurred in early attested forms. The consonant system included stops and affricates such as /p/, /t/, /k/, /b/, /d/, /g/, /č/, and /d͡ʒ/, alongside nasals (/m/, /n/, /ŋ/), fricatives (/s/, /ʃ/, /h/), liquids (/l/, /r/), and glides (/j/, /w/), with initial /p/ often shifting to /h/ in Common Turkic reflexes but retained in some reconstructions of the proto-form. Core vocabulary of PCT includes basic kinship and natural terms like *ata 'father' and *su 'water', which show regular correspondences across daughter languages such as Turkish *ata and *su, Uyghur *ata and *su, and Kazakh *ata and *su. Basic grammatical morphemes encompass the plural suffix -lar/-ler, which varies by vowel harmony (e.g., back harmony *at-lar 'fathers'; front harmony *köŋül-ler 'hearts' or *eŋil-ler 'lights'). Reconstruction of PCT draws from the Orkhon inscriptions (8th century CE, the earliest extensive Turkic texts), Middle Turkic sources such as the Dīwān Lughāt al-Turk (11th century) and Uyghur manuscripts, and comparative data from over 30 modern Common Turkic languages including Turkish, Kazakh, Uzbek, and Yakut. These materials enable systematic comparison to infer proto-forms, with ongoing refinements based on phonological and morphological regularities.

Evolution and periods

The evolution of Common Turkic languages following the Proto-Common Turkic stage is marked by significant historical, cultural, and political influences that drove linguistic divergence and standardization across . Emerging from the reconstructed Proto-Common Turkic around the 6th century CE, these languages underwent progressive differentiation through migrations and interactions, beginning with the Göktürk Empire's expansion in , which facilitated the spread of early dialects and led to initial regional variations by approximately 1000 CE. The historical development is conventionally divided into three main periods: (6th–13th centuries), Middle Turkic (13th–19th centuries), and the modern period (19th century onward). The period, attested primarily through inscriptions like the 8th-century Orkhon Turkic texts, represents the earliest written form, characterized by a unified grammatical structure with and , though dialects such as those of the and Karakhanids began to emerge. This era saw the initial spread via Göktürk migrations westward and the Seljuk expansions in the , which carried Oghuz dialects into and Persia, accelerating dialectal splits among branches like Oghuz, Kipchak, and Karluk. External influences were limited but included early Sogdian and Chinese loanwords, setting the stage for later integrations. During the Middle Turkic period, triggered by the Mongol invasions of the 13th century, languages like Chagatai became prominent literary standards in , reflecting greater regional specialization. The Kipchak branch incorporated substantial Mongol loanwords due to the Golden Horde's dominance, while Karluk and Oghuz varieties absorbed Persian and Arabic vocabulary through Islamic conversion and cultural exchange, evident in texts like the 11th-century Diwan Lughat al-Turk. This period also featured the transition to around the 10th–11th centuries, replacing the earlier runic (Orkhon-Yenisei) system and enabling broader literary production under Islamic patronage. In the modern period, beginning in the late , colonial and Soviet policies profoundly shaped and script reforms. Russian imperial and Soviet administrations imposed on many in –1940s, such as in Kazakh and Uzbek, to promote and administrative unity, while adopted a Latin-based script in 1928 to modernize and secularize . These changes, alongside efforts, led to codified standards for major languages like Turkish, Azerbaijani, and Kazakh, with ongoing shifts—such as Kazakhstan's planned transition to Latin by 2031 as of 2025—reflecting post-Soviet identity assertions. Overall, these periods illustrate how geopolitical movements and orthographic adaptations transformed a shared linguistic heritage into diverse yet interconnected modern varieties.

Classification

Major branches

The Common Turkic languages, also known as Shaz-Turkic, are traditionally subdivided into four major branches based on genealogical : the Oghuz (southwestern), Kipchak (northwestern), Karluk (southeastern), and Siberian (northeastern) branches. These divisions reflect the primary internal structure of the family following its early binary split from the Oghur (Bulgharic) branch around the 1st century BCE. The Oghuz branch comprises languages such as Turkish and Azerbaijani, spoken primarily in , the , and parts of . The Kipchak branch includes Kazakh and Tatar, distributed across and the Volga-Ural region. The Karluk branch features Uzbek and Uyghur, centered in and . The Siberian branch encompasses Yakut and Tuvan, located in and the Sayan region. These branches are delineated by bundles of shared isoglosses, including phonological developments like shifts and changes, as well as morphological innovations such as alterations in verbal conjugations and case marking. For instance, the Oghuz branch is characterized by innovations like the loss of intervocalic Proto-Common-Turkic *b- (e.g., yielding forms without the in certain derivations) and systematic shifts in gutturals, such as *g- > y- in initial positions. share features like the development of rounded front s from earlier unrounded ones in specific environments, alongside innovations in nominal pluralization. Karluk varieties exhibit reductions and mergers not found elsewhere, coupled with unique formations. Siberian languages display innovations such as the preservation of certain Proto-Turkic diphthongs and distinct evidential mood developments. Relative chronology, informed by and historical records, places the initial divergence of Oghuz and Kipchak around the 8th century CE, coinciding with the period documented in , followed by the separation of Karluk and Siberian branches in subsequent centuries amid migrations. Bayesian phylolinguistic modeling supports this sequence, estimating the North-South Siberian split around 474 CE (95% : 7 BCE–809 CE) and later nodes for Oghuz-Kipchak-Karluk clustering post-650 CE. The Arghu branch, primarily represented by Khalaj spoken in central , is regarded as a minor or debated independent lineage within Common Turkic, retaining archaic features like conservative consonant clusters that distinguish it from the major branches. This classification stems from its descent from Arghu dialects, with phonological and morphological traits setting it apart, though its exact position remains under discussion due to substrate influences.

Subgroups and languages

The Common Turkic languages are traditionally classified into four main subgroups: Oghuz (Southwestern), Kipchak (Northwestern), Karluk (Southeastern), and Siberian (Northeastern). These subgroups encompass the majority of living , excluding the divergent Oghuric branch represented by Chuvash. Each subgroup exhibits shared innovations, such as specific phonological shifts or morphological features, while individual languages within them show varying degrees of . The Oghuz subgroup comprises languages spoken primarily in western and southwestern Eurasia, characterized by innovations like the preservation of certain proto-vowel distinctions. Key languages include Turkish, with approximately 90 million speakers (as of 2025) mainly in Turkey and diaspora communities; Azerbaijani, spoken by about 30 million people in Azerbaijan, Iran, and surrounding regions; and Turkmen, with around 7 million speakers in Turkmenistan and adjacent areas. Other members encompass smaller languages and dialects such as Gagauz, spoken by roughly 150,000 people in Moldova, Ukraine, and Bulgaria, and Khorasani Turkic in northeastern Iran. These languages generally exhibit high mutual intelligibility within the subgroup. The Kipchak subgroup, or Northwestern Turkic, features languages distributed across , the , and , marked by developments like the fronting of certain back vowels. Major languages are Kazakh, with over 14 million speakers (as of 2022) in and ; Kyrgyz, spoken by about 5 million in and neighboring countries; Tatar, with approximately 5.5 million speakers in and Central Asia; and Bashkir, numbering around 1.5 million in . Subgroups include the Nogai languages (spoken by about 100,000 in the and ) and the languages (around 300,000 speakers in ). Crimean Tatar and Karaim represent Western Kipchak varieties, with smaller speaker bases of about 500,000 and fewer than 100 respectively (as of 2023). The extinct , spoken by nomadic groups in until the , is considered an early Kipchak variety. is moderate to high among core Kipchak languages like Kazakh and Kyrgyz. The Karluk subgroup, known as Southeastern or Uyghur-Karluk Turkic, includes languages from Central Asia with features like the merger of certain proto-consonants. Prominent examples are Uzbek, spoken by approximately 35 million people (as of 2023, including second-language speakers) in Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan; and Uyghur, with about 10 million speakers mainly in China's Xinjiang region. Ili Turki, a smaller language spoken by fewer than 100 people in Xinjiang, represents a distinct variety, classified as endangered. The Illakhani dialect, associated with historical Chagatai influences, persists in limited forms among Uyghur communities. Languages in this subgroup show significant mutual intelligibility, particularly between Uzbek and Uyghur. The Siberian subgroup, or Northeastern Turkic, consists of languages spoken in Siberia and the Russian Far East, distinguished by innovations such as extensive vowel harmony variations. Key languages include Sakha (Yakut), with around 450,000 speakers in Russia's Sakha Republic; Tuvan, spoken by about 280,000 in Tuva; and Khakas, with approximately 60,000 speakers in Khakassia. The Altay languages form a subgroup with around 70,000 speakers across dialects like Northern, Southern, and Kumandin; Dolgan, a variety of Sakha, has approximately 5,000 speakers (as of 2020) in northern Siberia. Many Siberian Turkic languages, such as Tofa (fewer than 100 speakers) and Chulym (under 100), are endangered or nearly extinct due to assimilation pressures. Mutual intelligibility within this subgroup is generally low, reflecting greater internal diversity.

Linguistic Features

Phonology

The phonology of Common Turkic languages is characterized by a systematic sound structure that emphasizes harmony and relative simplicity in inventories, shared across branches while exhibiting branch-specific variations. A defining feature is , which requires vowels within a word to agree in certain articulatory properties, primarily backness (front vs. back) and, to varying degrees, rounding (rounded vs. unrounded). This process ensures phonological cohesion, with suffixes adapting to the root vowel's features; for instance, in Turkish (an Oghuz language), the plural suffix appears as -ler after front-voweled roots like ev 'house' (yielding evler 'houses'), but as -lar after back-voweled roots like dağ 'mountain' (yielding dağlar 'mountains'). In Kazakh (a Kipchak language), similar patterns hold, with nine Proto-Turkic vowels preserved as a, ä, e, i, o, ö, ü, u, ı, influencing harmony across backness and . Three main types of opposition underpin this harmony: backness (e.g., a vs. ä), (unlabialized like a vs. labialized like o, ö), and roundness (narrow, wide, or medium variants). The inventory in Common Turkic languages typically comprises 20–30 phonemes, featuring a symmetrical set of stops (/p, b, t, d, k, g, q/), nasals (/m, n, ŋ/), liquids (/l, r/), and glides (/j, w/), alongside fricatives such as /f, s, ʃ, x, ɣ/ and affricates like /tʃ, dʒ/. Fricatives /f, s, ʃ/ are widespread, often with palatal variants influenced by adjacent , while affricates reflect Proto-Turkic origins and appear in roots like Turkish çocuk '' (/tʃ/ realization). Velar-uvular distinctions are common, with uvulars (/q, ʁ/) alternating with velars (/k, g/) based on backness due to , as seen in Kazakh where /q/ pairs with back vowels and /k/ with front ones. Borrowed sounds like /f/ and /v/ may appear in loanwords but are integrated into native patterns. Prosodic features support the agglutinative nature of these languages, with word stress typically fixed on the final of the or prosodic word, often shifting rightward with suffixes but insensitive to quantity in core cases. In Turkish, this results in patterns like ev-ler stressed on the final , with exceptions for unstressable suffixes that retrogress stress. is minimal or absent in unstressed positions, preserving full quality to maintain , though epenthetic vowels may insert to avoid clusters in some contexts. Variations across branches reflect historical and contact influences. In the Oghuz branch (e.g., Turkish), labial vowel harmony is restricted to high vowels and shows root-internal disharmony with unmarked vowels like /i, e, a, o, u/, diverging from the fuller systems in other branches. , such as Kazakh, exhibit strengthened uvular consonants (/q, ʁ/) due to substrate effects from pre-Turkic populations, enhancing dorsal contrasts tied to vowel backness. In like Uzbek, overall weakens, with suffixes less consistently adapting (e.g., kitob-lar 'books' ignoring root rounding), influenced by Persian and Russian contact.

Grammar

Common Turkic languages are characterized by their agglutinative morphology, in which are primarily expressed through the addition of suffixes to stems, allowing for a high degree of transparency and regularity in . For nouns, suffixes indicate case, such as the nominative (unmarked, -ø), genitive (-nıŋ), and dative (-ğa/-ge), while possessive suffixes denote ownership, for example, the first-person singular -ım in forms like Turkish ev-im ("my house"). Verbs similarly agglutinate suffixes for tense and aspect, including the simple past marker -dı/-di/-du/-dү/-dı (vowel harmony-dependent), as in Kazakh kel-di ("came"). This suffixation system adheres to phonological constraints like , ensuring suffixes harmonize with the stem's vowels, though the specifics of harmony vary across languages. Syntactically, Common Turkic languages lack and definite or indefinite articles, relying instead on context or for specificity. The canonical is subject-object-verb (SOV), as seen in Turkish constructions like Ali kitabı okudu ("Ali book read" = "Ali read the book"). Prepositions are absent; instead, postpositions follow nouns to express spatial, temporal, or relational meanings, such as Turkish için ("for") in ev için ("for the house"). Questions are typically formed by adding the particle -mı/-mi/-mu/-mү (harmonizing with the stem), placed at the end of the sentence, as in Turkish Gidiyor mu? ("Is he/she going?"). Branch-specific grammatical traits further diversify the family while maintaining core Common Turkic patterns. For instance, marking differs between branches: often use -acak/-ecek, whereas employ -ecek/-acak, both appended to the verb stem to indicate or , as in Turkish gidecek ("will go") versus similar forms in Kazakh. In , is prominently grammaticalized, distinguishing firsthand (direct) from reported or inferred (indirect) information through dedicated verbal suffixes, such as Tuvan's -DÏ for witnessed past events (e.g., kel-di: "I saw him come") and -GAn for non-witnessed ones (e.g., kel-gan: "He reportedly came"). These markers integrate with tense-aspect systems, enhancing the expression of epistemic modality in and conversational contexts.

Distribution and Usage

Geographic spread

The Common Turkic languages, encompassing branches such as Oghuz, Kipchak, and Karluk, are primarily spoken across a vast expanse of Eurasia, with core concentrations in , , , and . In , languages like Kazakh, , , and Turkmen predominate in countries such as , , , and , reflecting the region's role as a historical crossroads for Turkic-speaking nomads. serves as the heartland for Turkish, the most widely spoken Common Turkic language, extending into parts of and adjacent areas. , including Yakut and various Altai dialects, are distributed across Russia's expansive northern territories from the Yenisei River eastward. In China's Uyghur Autonomous Region, Uyghur represents a key Karluk branch language spoken by indigenous communities in the and surrounding oases. This broad yet discontinuous geographic spread traces back to historical migrations originating in the steppes of and southern around the 6th century CE, when Proto-Turkic speakers, as part of nomadic confederations like the , expanded westward through the . These movements, driven by conquests, trade routes, and pressures from neighboring empires such as the , carried Turkic languages across into the , , and by the medieval period, fragmenting their distribution amid diverse linguistic landscapes. Later waves, including the Oghuz migrations in the , further solidified presences in and the following the Seljuk expansions. Beyond these core regions, significant diaspora communities maintain Common Turkic languages in peripheral areas. Turkish-speaking populations persist in the , particularly in , , and , as remnants of Ottoman-era settlements and subsequent migrations. In Russia's Volga-Ural region, Tatar (a Kipchak language) is spoken by communities centered in and , forming ethnic enclaves with deep historical roots in the Golden Horde's legacy. Uyghur speakers also form notable diaspora groups in , where around 300,000 individuals (as of 2024) trace their origins to mid-20th-century migrations from , concentrating in urban centers like . The formation of modern nation-states has profoundly shaped the territorial boundaries of Common Turkic languages, often aligning them with independent republics post-Soviet dissolution in 1991, such as the standardized use of Kazakh in and Uzbek in . In , state policies since the early have centralized Turkish as the , influencing its spread within while marginalizing minority dialects. Additionally, Turkish migrant populations in the , particularly in and the , have established linguistic enclaves through labor migrations since the 1960s, adapting to host country policies while preserving community use.

Speaker demographics

The Common Turkic languages are spoken by approximately 180–200 million people worldwide, including both native and second-language users, making them one of the largest language families by speaker population. Turkish, the most widely spoken, has around 82 million native speakers, primarily in , while Uzbek follows with about 40 million native speakers, concentrated in and neighboring regions. Other major languages like Kazakh, Azerbaijani, and Uyghur contribute significantly to this total, with speaker numbers reflecting the family's broad distribution across . In terms of vitality, many Common Turkic languages remain robust, serving as official or national languages in countries such as , , , , , and , where they are used in , media, and government. For instance, Turkish and Kazakh are considered stable and vital, with institutional support ensuring their continued transmission to younger generations. However, several smaller varieties face endangerment, particularly in and , due to assimilation pressures and low speaker numbers. Northern Altai, for example, is classified as endangered with limited intergenerational transmission, while Tofa is critically endangered, spoken by around 70 elderly individuals (as of 2020). Multilingualism is prevalent among Turkic speakers, often involving dominant regional languages that influence daily communication and cultural practices. In former Soviet states, bilingualism with Russian is widespread, stemming from historical policies that promoted it as a , while in and , Persian (or Tajik) serves a similar role in cross-ethnic interactions. In , , Uyghur speakers commonly use Chinese in official and educational contexts alongside their native tongue. also occurs in certain communities, where standardized forms (often based on literary varieties) contrast with spoken dialects, as observed in the Turkish-speaking population of , . Speaker demographics have shown varied trends over recent decades. In Turkey and Azerbaijan, numbers have grown steadily due to population increases and strong national policies promoting language use, with Turkish speakers benefiting from Turkey's expanding diaspora and media influence. Conversely, Soviet-era Russification policies led to significant declines in many Turkic languages in Central Asia and Siberia, reducing native proficiency through education in Russian and urban migration. Post-1991, following the Soviet Union's dissolution, revival efforts in independent states like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have bolstered usage through language reforms, curriculum integration, and cultural initiatives, countering earlier losses and fostering renewed vitality. As of 2025, Kazakhstan has intensified efforts to increase Kazakh language use in public sectors, aiming for 80% coverage in education.

References

  1. https://academic.oup.com/jole/article/5/1/39/5736268
  2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319468501_Complexity_of_Case_Systems_of_Historical_Turkic_Languages_Old_Turkic_Pre-Mongolic_Period
  3. https://www.uu.se/en/study/subject/turkic-languages
  4. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/chv/
  5. https://www.ethnologue.com/
  6. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Turkic-languages
  7. https://www.swarthmore.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/linguistics/2004_mrowicki_grace.pdf
  8. https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/comm1245
  9. https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/37877079/5714_State_Art_Uralic_Studies_OA_0.pdf
  10. https://iling-ran.ru/savelyev/2020_chuvash_and_the_bulgharic_languages.pdf
  11. https://academic.oup.com/jole/article/3/2/145/5067185
  12. https://altaica.ru/LIBRARY/turks/Erdal_OTG.pdf
  13. https://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp325_proto_Turkic_consonants.pdf
  14. https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstreams/27067f7d-81ae-441d-b8d7-efbe8dca3dcb/download
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4405460/
  16. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1422594.pdf
  17. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/turkic/language-contacts/21B0265461CD25F58EB169C54A540C61
  18. https://astanatimes.com/2024/09/turkic-states-revive-latin-based-alphabet-to-preserve-linguistic-heritage/
  19. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/turkic/turkic-language-family/783EA334D9E40F3D10A3280AA17A1479
  20. https://referenceworks.brill.com/display/entries/ETLO/SIM-031966.xml
  21. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/iranian-studies/article/major-and-minor-turkic-language-islands-in-iran-with-a-special-focus-on-khalaj/1B62C153F56E577801A552BC39AC44FF
  22. https://referenceworks.brill.com/display/entries/ETLO/SIM-031966.xml?language=en
  23. https://www.britannica.com/topic/languages-by-total-number-of-speakers-2228881
  24. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1114954.pdf
  25. https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai/article/download/5003/5950/11727
  26. https://oozcelik.pages.iu.edu/papers/Kazakh%20phonology.pdf
  27. https://harry-van-der-hulst.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1733/2016/05/046-Topics-in-Turkish-Phonology.pdf
  28. https://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/tu/article/download/5061/4814
  29. https://roa.rutgers.edu/files/4-0000/roa-4-kirchner-3.pdf
  30. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Turkic-languages/Linguistic-structure
  31. https://www.magnanimitas.cz/ADALTA/110221/papers/A_14.pdf
  32. https://ls-japan.jpn.org/modules/documents/LSJpapers/meeting/163/handouts/a/A-2_163.pdf
  33. https://international.ucla.edu/institute/article/139257
  34. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Courses/Mizzou_Academy/World_History_A_B/08%253A_Central_Asia/8.05%253A_Turkic_Migrations
  35. https://thediplomat.com/2016/06/the-epic-story-of-how-the-turks-migrated-from-central-asia-to-turkey/
  36. https://www.insightturkey.com/articles/turkish-interests-and-involvement-in-the-western-balkans-a-score-card
  37. http://www.kroraina.com/fadlan/rorlich1.html
  38. https://minorityrights.org/communities/uyghurs-2/
  39. https://bellisariostudentmedia.psu.edu/story/kazakhstan-hosts-uyghur-cultural-revival
  40. https://repository.upenn.edu/bitstreams/a308fa07-b38d-4d62-933a-81dae5b589ff/download
  41. https://www.academia.edu/69642991/_How_will_Turkish_survive_in_Northwestern_Europe
  42. https://nu.kz.libguides.com/turkiclanguages
  43. https://www.worlddata.info/languages/turkish.php
  44. https://www.worlddata.info/languages/uzbek.php
  45. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/tur/
  46. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/atv/
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340966459_Diglossia_features_and_bilingualism_in_the_Turkish-speaking_community_of_Western_Thrace
  48. https://www.bakunetwork.org/en/news/analytics/14406
  49. https://researchcentre.trtworld.com/publications/perspectives/the-turkic-world-is-on-the-edge-of-a-historic-revival/
  50. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=133660
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.