|
|
Post by ryukyurhymer on Jul 9, 2008 12:31:50 GMT 3
For speakers of Turkish, how would you rate the intelligibility of other Turkic languages? Try to include as many languages as you've heard or read
on a scale of 1 - 10, with 1 being the most intelligible, to 10 being the most difficult to understand...
for example: Azeri - 1, Yakut - 10
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 9, 2008 13:48:39 GMT 3
Iraqi Turkmen, Syrian Turkmen, Azeri and Gagauz are the closest to Anatolian Turkish, followed by Crimean Tatar, Turkmen (eastern), Uzbek, Uyghur and Kazan Tatar. Qazaq, Qygrhyz, Bashqurt, etc are less similar. The most different are those in Siberia, plus Chuvash.
Iraqi Turkmen, Syrian Turkmen, Azeri and Gagauz would be 1-2
Crimean Tatar, Turkmen (eastern), Uzbek, Uyghur and Kazan Tatar would be 3-4 (though for example, Uzbek is closer than Uyghur)
Qazaq, Qygrhyz, Bashqurt, etc would be 5-6
Siberian dialects would be 7-8
Chuvash would be 9-10
|
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Jul 9, 2008 15:56:17 GMT 3
Expanding this scope to the other Altaic languages. Could Mongolian or Manchurian fall within this intelligibility scale? Or is it as soon as it falls outside the Turkic branch of languages, it is just un-intelligible without closer examination?
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 9, 2008 18:25:01 GMT 3
They are totally different languages which are not intelligible for the common Turks. Even I know only several dozens of words in Mongolian, which is not enough for me to understand the language.
|
|
