Omniglot forum • View topic

VROOR · **Posted:** Sat 12 Dec 2009 8:39 pm

Sobekhotep wrote:

VROOR wrote:

The Numbers:

01. ber
02. şikki
03. iç
04. tuwertu
05. peş
06. alltey
07. yetey
08. sekuz
09. tokuz
10. wen

Uzbek numbers 1-10: bir, ikki, uch, to'rt, besh, olti, yetti, sakkiz, to'qqiz, o'n.
My conclusion: it looks like the numbers of this Uyghur pidgin are of Turkic origin; none of them appear to come from Chinese.

Indeed, this pidgin did not adopt the chinese numbers (at least, not to my knowledge) but, it did adopt the chinese counting-system: the numbers from 11~19, the way they are constructed is same for turkic and chinese languages but, the numbers from 20~99 in this pidgin are immediate signs of chinese counting-system...instead having different words for 20 and 30 so on, the pidgin has şikkiwen for 20 and içuwen for 30 so on.

formiko wrote:

The Turkic languages are one of my least studied language families, although I think Turkish itself is fascinating. I somehow lump all Turkish languages together (soft of like Scandinavian languages, but truly, how close are they? I'd like this answered by a native or someone who is very familiar with the family. Can an Uzbek read aTurkish newspaper?? Can a Kazakh understand a Turkish conversation? I'üe met quite a few Turks who say those languages are like Chinese to them, but I always sensed a tone of derision and they may not have been completely truthful (for political reasons probably)

I dare to state those turks lied because, once when I spoken in Uyghur without loan-words to a Turkish individual, he understood perfectly but insisted that I was speaking pure turkish with an odd accent and not Uyghur (and he would say the same for most turkic languages in the world).

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Sun 13 Dec 2009 5:16 am

VROOR wrote:

once when I spoken in Uyghur without loan-words to a Turkish individual, he understood perfectly but insisted that I was speaking pure turkish with an odd accent and not Uyghur (and he would say the same for most turkic languages in the world).

Try speaking Tuvan next time.

VROOR · **Posted:** Sun 13 Dec 2009 11:07 pm

Sobekhotep wrote:

Try speaking Tuvan next time.

Oh well, Turkish people would have a hard time understanding Tuvan because, Tuvan never was devoloped unter Islamic influences (thus, lacks the universal shared perso-arabic vocabularies) and, has a large loan-words from the mongolian language.

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Mon 14 Dec 2009 2:05 am

VROOR wrote:

Turkish people would have a hard time understanding Tuvan because, Tuvan never was devoloped unter Islamic influences (thus, lacks the universal shared perso-arabic vocabularies) and, has a large loan-words from the mongolian language.

I know, that's why I suggested it. 8-)

VROOR · **Posted:** Mon 14 Dec 2009 7:23 am

Sobekhotep wrote:

I know, that's why I suggested it.

Thank you for that suggestion, it can be an interesting situation perhaps.

Dan_ad_nauseam · Joined:Sat 18 Apr 2009 5:25 am Posts:199

The Uighur Creole appears a good test case for the universal creole grammar hypothesis. Has it been studied enough to support a comparison?

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Sat 19 Dec 2009 5:35 am

Dan_ad_nauseam wrote:

The Uighur Creole appears a good test case for the universal creole grammar hypothesis. Has it been studied enough to support a comparison?

Remember, it's a pidgin, not a creole. But, I doubt there's much research about it.

VROOR · **Posted:** Thu 24 Dec 2009 5:56 am

Dan_ad_nauseam wrote:

Has it been studied enough to support a comparison?

Despite the large numbers of people who are able to use this uyghur pigdin to communicate, the academia itself seems not yet interested in researching this pigdin. Hopefully, in the near future some of us can spark the interests in the academia to sway in this direction.