- December 28, 2018 at 11:42 am #474654
Turkic peoples are neighbors of Slavs probably from the times of Huns who presumably were (at least partially) Turkic. Today Slavic country of Bulgaria was initially founded by the Bulgarian Turkic tribe. Russian state was strongly influenced by mostly Turkic Golden Orda. And South Slavs were impacted by Ottoman Turkey.
Slavic languages most influenced by Turkic languages are in my opinion Bulgarian and Russian, in smaller extent Ukrainian and Serbian as well (or am I wrong?).
I hope that our Bulgarian and Russian friends help to fill this topic.
But be careful. Some words borrowed by Slavs from Turkic languages are not really Turkic but have Mongol, Persian or Arabian origin.December 28, 2018 at 11:47 am #474655
From Turkic “kazak” – “vagrant, free warrior”
In fact the word “Kazakh” (from which “Kazakhstan” is derived) is exactly the same word.
Initially it was “Kazak”, “k” was replaced by “kh” just to distinguish it from the Russian “kazak”.December 30, 2018 at 12:05 am #474683
Bulgarian Turkic tribe? What’s that? If you’re talking about the Bulgars, their presumed Turkic origin is highly debatable in light of the modern historiography.
Otherwise, even the most hardcore supporters of the Turkic-origin thesis have managed to gather only about 15 supposedly Turkic words of Bulgar origin. Words like biser (pearl), chertog (palace), bъbrek (kidney), kumir (idol), kniga (book, though that one’s supposedly Chinese in origin – kuan), beleg (scar/mark), kolchan (quiver), korem (belly), pale (puppy), toyaga (staff).January 2, 2019 at 4:23 am #474699
I see that we definitely need a separate topic:
Iranian loanwords in Slavic languagesJanuary 2, 2019 at 4:37 am #474702January 2, 2019 at 5:00 am #474707
It’s difficult to read or search in Bulgarian dictionaries words where Latin and Cyrillic characters are mixed. Could You please use only Cyrillic characters for Bulgarian words? (As far as I know Bulgarians do not have own version of Latin ABC as Serbians and Belorusians?)
Thank You.January 2, 2019 at 5:04 am #474708
The origin of “кумиръ” is unknown. May be it’s Semitic.January 2, 2019 at 5:07 am #474710
“бисер” is Arabic
“чертог” is PersianJanuary 2, 2019 at 5:10 am #474711January 2, 2019 at 1:16 pm #474754
NikeBGParticipant@nikebgMarch 14, 2019 at 8:20 am #478098June 4, 2019 at 1:47 pm #486149
Ottoman loanwords in Slovenian (via Serbocroatian):
torba – handbag (TR: torba)
top – cannon (top)
buzdovan – flail, mace (bozdağan)
baker – copper (bakır)
non-Ottoman Turkic loanwords in Slovenian:
sablja – sabre
klobuk – hat (kalpak)June 25, 2019 at 6:28 pm #488149
The debate is not really about the people, who are Slavic with ancestry from ancient Thracians, but about the ruling class, who are debatably Turkic or Iranian. No one doubts the validity of calling Bulgarians and Bulgaria Slavic. There was another Bulgaria as well, namely Volga Bulgaria, which was a splinter group that became the modern Chuvash and Volga Tatar peoples. The ruling class for both these Bulgarias were the Dulo clan, though in Bulgaria the Dulo clan was overthrown by the local Slavic peoples who had by this time adopted the name of Bulgarian.
Slavic Bulgarians and Slavic Russians are very similar in the regard that a self-identifier originally foreign to them became their self-word. Rus is from the Vikings, while the Bulgars were the people who brought the term to the Slavs of Moesia, bringing a new name to the people and the land, from Slavic Meosian to Slavic Bulgarian.
Again, as you said, it is debatable. I will not declare as to whether the Bulgars who gave Bulgaria its name were Turkic or Iranian. The Volga Bulgars were Turkic, but they also had significant Turkic populations in the Volga Bulgarian region. Old Great Bulgaria was in the Pontic Steppes, which at the time of that state was inhabited by Iranian Scythians. It may have been that the Old Great Bulgaria was a Turkic conqueror in the region, lording over Scythians, or they could have been another Iranian group that had conquered the Scythians. Regardless, the Old Great Bulgaria split in two, and one became Bulgaria proper while the other became Volga Bulgaria (which evolved in the Kazan Khanate). One saw the original Bulgar ruling class overthrown by the local Slavs who had adopted the self-word of Bulgarian, while the other remained. It’s all still a debate, and probably one that won’t ever be resolved due to the fact that an original Bulgar (speaking the proto-Bulgarian language, whether or not its Turkic or Iranian, it wasn’t Slavic language) no longer exists.July 7, 2019 at 9:22 pm #489478
Indeed, there is no way the Bulgarians are Iranians or Turks. The reason is not only linguistic, but also racial and religious. The Turks are Mongoloids, while the Bulgarians are Caucasoids(Pontids and Dinarids). While the Iranians are Iranid Caucasoids. Never in Volga Bulgaria, Turkic was not an official language. Many Islamic chroniclers and travelers say the Bulgarian is different from Turkic, but it is similar to the language of the other Sakalibas (Scythians / Slavs) and Khazars.
For example, the names of Bulgarian rulers and aristocrats are very different from Iranian and Turkic.
Boris, Boyan, Isbul, Krovat, Isperikh(Ispor rex), Tervel, Bezmer, Buzan, Persiyan/Prusian, Malamir, Dox and etc.
Chuvash and Tatar come in the Volga region with the Mongol invasion. Only one Bulgarian title is similar to a Turkic title and this is the title tarxan. Other Bulgarian titles such as: Kunaz ubigi(From the God Knyaz), Bagain, Crgobylia(first minister), kanabilya-kolober, kanartgin, kavkan, Kopan(Zupan), Voyvode, bilya/bolyar(aristocrate), Ban, Vityaz, Bogatir(rich knight) have no Turkic background. The Bulgars were earlier called Moesi.July 9, 2019 at 1:17 am #489613
The ruling class of the two Bulgarias were non-Slavic in their beginning. One of the most famous leaders of the first Bulgarian Empire was called Khan Krum. Also, the Slavs that are now called Bulgarians came before the Bulgars, migrating into Roman Moesia prior to the Bulgarian conquest. Bulgaria and Rus have a similar history, which consists of Slavic groups getting taken over by a non-Slavic ruling class which Slavicises, with the leaders and nobility taking up Slavic names and titles in the end. Again, the evidence that is there suggests, at the very least, Turkic and/or Iranian influences or even origins of the ruling class of both Volga and Danube Bulgaria. Slavic titles weren’t used by either Rus nor Danube Bulgaria until a sufficient amount of generations and time had passed where knyaz had replaced konungr and khan in Rus and Bulgaria, respectively. If we only looked at rulers as the show of the culture of the people at the time, we’d be wondering how Latvia and Estonia weren’t speaking German after seven hundred years of Baltic German domination of government and culture. The ruling class can be of a different culture. Sometimes, like in Rus and Danube (and maybe Volga) Bulgaria, they assimilate to the people. Other times, like the Baltic Germans, they remain distinct from, and even hated by, those that they rule over.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.