Бидний тухай
Багш ажилтан
Abstract In the academic record of any scientific discipline, the terminology specific to that field and the theoretical concepts it encompasses are crucial in relevance and priority. This lexicon is continually enriched through scientific achievements, new knowledge, and the outcomes of research endeavors within the domain. Indeed, the necessity to assign new terms in one's language and clarify associated concepts arises particularly as a result of each master's and doctoral thesis work, as well as innovative research works. The purpose of this article is to consider the terminological issues within the scope of the thesis work "The Comparative Study of English-Mongolian Phonology". Firstly, we address assigning terms to phenomena inherent to English phonology but absent within Mongolian phonological structures. Secondly, we aim to designate terminologies that exist with different names within Mongolian linguistic dictionaries. In the context of the aforementioned thesis work, we selected the terms related to English phonology and assessed their inclusion in Mongolian dictionaries and their treatment in research. Where these terms were found, we conducted a comparative analysis to understand their respective assignments in Mongolian within each dictionary. As a general practice, if the same terms had consistent definitions across most previous dictionaries and had already been entrenched in teaching and research, we opted to maintain continuity by adhering to those established terms. Additionally, terms established in "Phonetics and Phonology", Volume VIII of "Mongolian Language Studies," authored by Urtnasan et al. (2022), were adopted, given their foundation in empirical research. However, for the terms sampled from the selection, those that belong to English phonological phenomena not translated into Mongolian, as well as terms typically rendered into Mongolian in various ways in previous research, were subjected to theoretical definitions and explanations. Examples were provided to illustrate the application of these terms. Accordingly, phonological terms of the English language were categorized into four parts. It is important to note that it is not feasible to discuss every term in this article; therefore, only some of the key terms were selected, and one to two examples were provided in each section for clarification. By providing such detailed explanations and proposed translations, we aim to ensure clarity and accuracy in the assignment and understanding of scientific terms within the English-Mongolian phonological context.
Field research of local dialects in Mongolia intensified during 1955-1970s and consequently several works on the classification of local dialects were published. When these works were analyzed, some local dialects were classified into Buryat, Oirat or Khalkha groups based on ethnic origins of the speakers due to lack of sufficient source data. This was undoubtedly a significant result to some extent at that time. However, language evolves in accordance with social, historical and political circumstances. Therefore the Buryat dialect of Khuvsgul was selected as the research subject due its scarce documentation and the need for accurate classification. As a result of this research, the following conclusions were made. The local dialect of the Buryat ethnic people of Khuvsgul is: 1. a Khalkhized Buryat dialect or a Khalkha dialect with Buryat root 2. is an endangered language as it assimilated to Khalkha dialect and should be considered part of Khalkha dialect group 3. a real-world example of the influence a country’s official script and its main dialect has on local dialects. Moreover, depending on their geographical location, there are other dialects that have become Khalkhized and Oiratized. There is a need for contemporary analysis and re-classification of Mongolia’s local dialects.
1. 13-15-р зуунд өөрийн бичиг үсэг, түүнд зориулсан хэл зүйн тайлбарыг боловсруулах явдал Монголын эзэнт гүрэн, Юань улс, Чусон улсын үед ижил хүсэл эрмэлзэл, сонирхлоор өрнөж, түүний дүнд монгол хэлний хувьд уйгаржин монгол бичигт тулгуурласан түүний хэл зүйн бичиг “Зүрхэн толт”, дөрвөлжин үсэг, түүний тайлбар, солонгос хэлний хувьд “Хүньминьчоным, түүний хэлний тайлбар” бий болж шууд болон дам уламжлан иржээ. 2. Аль алинд нь үеийн онол, арга зүйг голлосон боловч монгол бичгийн хувьд үеэр амилуулан үе үсэг үүсгэсэн, солонгос хэлний хувьд дуудлагыг тодруулахдаа үеийг ашиглажээ. Нөгөө талаас монгол хэлний үеэр амилуулсныг хураан авиа тэмдэглэсэн үсгийг авч үзвэл “Зүрхэн толт” ба “Хүньминьчоным”-д тэмдэглэсэн авиа 25, 28 гэсэн ойролцоо тоотой байна. Үүн дотор дэвсгэр үсэг мөн ойролцоо. Гол гурван эгшиг авиаг төв болгон үзсэн нь бас адил ажээ. 3. Үсгийн тиг хэлбэр зэргийг зэрэгцүүлэн судалсан эрдэмтэд дөрвөлжин үсэг хангыл үсгийн төстэй хэлбэрийг дурдсан байдаг бол “Зүрхэн толт” болон “Хүньминьчонымын тайлбар”-т агуулгын, онолын, дорно дахины хэл шинжлэлийн уламжлалын адил төстэй чанарууд хадгалагдаж байна. Тухайлбал, үеийн онол, дэвсгэр үсэг, авианы байрын хууль, бүтэх аргын шинжээр тайлбарласан зэрэг нь уг хоёр сурвалжийн харилцаа холбоог илэрхийлнэ. Монгол хэлний хувьд Энэтхэг-төвдийн уламжлал, солонгос хэлний хувьд хятадын уламжлал голлосон гэж үздэг ч бичих тогтолцооноос эхлээд онол арга зүйн хувьд яах аргагүй дорно дахины уламжлал гэж хэлж болохоор байна.
Их хотын монголчуудын хэлний байдал (2018 оны кэйсээр)
Vowel reduction in Ulaanbaatar speech typically occurs on any syllable of a word with more than three syllables. Due to morphophonemic, three consonant combinations also occur in Ulaanbaatar speech. The reason for this is devoicing due to aspiration, and on the other hand, lengthening is formed.
Дундад үеийн монгол хэл болон XVII-XVIII зууны монгол хэлний баримт, орчин үеийн монгол хэлний төрөл хэл, нутгийн аялгууны үгийн санг сурвалж болгон монгол хэлний гийгүүлэгчийн сулралын хувьслыг авч үзнэ. Ингэхдээ монгол хэлний гийгүүлэгчийн сулрал, сугаралын тухайт онолын асуудлыг дэлгэрүүлэн монгол хэл аялгуунд үгийн олон хэлбэр бий болсон шалтгааныг гийгүүлэгчийн сулралын хувьслаар тайлбарлана. Үүнд үгийн эхэн, дунд, төгсгөлийн авианы байр (sound distribution) чухал бөгөөд авианы харилцан нөлөөллийн хувьслаар (phonological phenomenon) тайлбарлаж монгол хэлний гийгүүлэгчийн сугарлын тогтолцоог томьёолохоор зорьсон юм. Уг илтгэлийн анхдагч дата нь дундад үеийн монгол хэлний ханз үсгийн болон дөрвөлжин үсгийн сурвалж, хоёрдогч дата нь орчин үеийн монгол хэл, аялгууны үгийн сан байх юм.
“In August 2021, We conducted field research in Tsagaan Uur soum on the northern border of Khuvsgul province, Mongolia (this research has received funding from the project (P2020-3951) supported by the National University of Mongolia). The research examines the language, cultural and social changes of the local Buryat ethnic group and the effects of Mongolian history, social structure, migration, and settlement. The Buryats are considered as the majority ethnic group of Tsagaan Uur soum, although as a result of intermarriages with other ethnic groups such as Tuva, Darkhad, and Khalkha, and most Buryat families are now of mixed ethnicity. We met with Buryat families who only married within their ethnic group and discovered their history of ancestry, language, and cultural elements. Their language has become influenced by the language of Mongolia’s ethnic majority group Khalkhas and changed more compared to Buryats those in other places, but many of their cultural elements have preserved its Buryat heritage.
Some scholars regard Mongolian language learning during the 13th century as the beginning of Mongolian studies in Korea while other scholars estimate it even earlier during the Khitan period (9th-10th century). Contemporary Mongolian studies in Korea started in the 1950s and the main resources were three books Mongolian No-geol-dae, Cheop-hae Mong-eo and Mong-eo Ryu-hae written for Koreans during the 13th century and collectively known as “Three sources of Mongolian Studies”. In 1990, the two countries established diplomatic relations and the Department of Mongolian Studies was founded at Dankook University. During the past 30 years, Korea’s Mongolists have achieved international recognition and Professor Lee Seonggyu has been the one responsible for educating and graduating them and leading training and research programs. Hence, he is respected as the most prominent Korean Mongolist academic who has played an important role in Mongolian-Korean relations. In this article, firstly, we will introduce and classify his academic papers as registered in the Korea Citation Index (https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/main.kci). He has conducted wide variety of research in the field of Mongolian studies, such as source studies, historical linguistics, Khitan studies, orthography, modern Mongolian language and local dialects. He also leads in terms of number of studies published. Secondly, in this article we wrote an academic review of Professor Lee Seonggyu’s work “Linguistic analysis of Three Sources of Mongolian Studies” (蒙學三書의 蒙古語 硏究, 2002). The three sources are Mongolian No-geol-dae (蒙語老乞大, 1790), Mong-eo Ryu-hae (蒙語類解, 1790) and Cheop-hae Mong-eo (捷解蒙語, 1790) and Professor Lee Seonggyu published a comprehensive study on all forms and grammatical systems of the written and colloquial language within their lexicons. This work will not only serve as a foundation for students who will continue to study the linguistics of "Three Sources of Mongolian Studies", but it also became an important comparative study from historical point of view between the morphological features of this period of Mongolian historical language and other sources and dialects.
Халхажсан буриад угсаатан Ууссан аялгуу Угсаа нь буриад, хэл нь халх → Нутгийн аялгууны ангиалалд Халх аялгууны бүлэг
Korean names of people and places are inconsistently spelled with Mongolian Cyrillic letters. The reason for this is the lack of comparative study results on the phonology of Korean-Mongolian languages. Comparative phonological study to date has tabulated the basic phonemes of the two languages side by side. However, the phonological patterns that develop as a result of the mutual influence of sounds, such as how Korean consonants that are pronounced at the beginning of words correspond to Mongolian sounds and why they are pronounced voiced or voiceless, have not been clarified. For example, 조선 → It is written as Чусон (Chuson), Жусон (Juson), Джусөн (Djusön), etc. Vowels have only been matched by ear. A system that determines how to spell Korean vowels in Cyrillic based on a comparison study of the differences between the places of articulation and the size of the oral cavity, and which phonological environments are similar or the opposite in the two languages, has not been established. For example, 서울 → It has been written as Сөүл (Söül), Сеүл (Syeül), Сэүл (Seül), Соул (Soul), etc. Until the 1990s, English words were introduced into the Mongolian language through Russian. Moreover, since the 1990s, there have also been relatively few comparison studies between the phonology of the English and Mongolian languages. As a result, the same English term has been spelled in several ways. For instance, the English name William is written in Mongolian as Уиллиам, Уилиам, Вилиам, or Вилльям. On the other hand, the method of writing proper names of Korean in English and English words in Hangul is consistent and follows the regulation of “Foreign language notation” (외래어 표기법). Therefore, in this paper, we compare the phonology of Mongolian and Korean languages in tandem with the main phonological principles of "Korean, English" and "English, Mongolian" and make a comparative phonological research proposal that can serve as a foundation for denoting Korean words with Mongolian Cyrillic letters and Mongolian words with Hangul letters. Of course, the core source materials will be comparative experimental research in phonetics and trilingual IPA. Until now, researchers have concentrated on how to pronounce and mark sounds in terms of the sound distribution and formation manner in a language, but in this article, we will discuss how one sound affects another sound when one syllable follows another syllable, when saying a compound word, as well as in morpho phonemics from the perspective of phonological system and also, we will propose a comparative suggestion. For example, there is no stress in Mongolian, but it is considered that the rhythm regulates the vowels in a Mongolian word. This serves as a basis for marking Korean two-syllable words in Cyrillic and determining which suffixes are attached to those words. Because there is no single phoneme as it is the smallest unit that makes up morphemes and words and each word's sound appear in its distinctive version since the beginning and ending with some sounds are always coherently articulated. In other words, the beginning and the ending of a particular sound in both Mongolian and Korean languages are affected by the mutual influence of adjacent sounds. This "reciprocal influence" is expressed by devoicing of voiced consonants, the dissimilation and the assimilation of similar sounds, being governed by the law of closed syllables and open syllables at the beginning and end of the word in terms of the manner of articulation, and by palatalization, non-palatalization, labialization, and non-labialization in terms of the place of articulation. Therefore, the same phoneme that occurs in different words and different syllables appears in different versions. However, its system can be defined based on the general laws of phonetics and the principles of orthography.
Бүтээвэр ба үгийн санд холбогдох авиалбарзүйн асуудлууд
The features of national mentality are commonly emerged in its language and more specifically in its idioms and idiomatic expressions. A study on idioms plays a prominent role in the studies on Mongolian lexicology. In addition to studies clarifying and explaining the meaning of Mongolian idioms thus identifying the features of national mentality, recently a number of comparative studies on idioms of two different languages have been published. The social disintegration that happened throughout history in Mongolia caused differences in language dialects of Mongolian ethnic groups. Some Mongolian nomads had moved to the settled culture earlier than others. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to clarify the distinctive features of two dialects of the same language that are coexisting in two different countries, cultures and social relations by examining their idioms. Studies on Mongolian idioms and proverbs and comparative studies with other languages have been published in the past, however this study is the first comparative study on idioms of two dialects within the Mongolian language. This paper aims to introduce the language status of Xinjiang Oirats and to explain language evolution by examining the semantic and lexical changes in idioms of two dialects of one language.
Гэсэрийн туужуудын хэлний судалгаа
Some lexical properties in the dialects of the Xinjiang Oirats who transited from nomadic to settled culture
Мун-о нуголдэ-гийн жишээгээр
The three books, published in the late 18th century by Chuseon’s `Sayeokwon (사역원)` and renowned as The Three Books for the Study of Mongolian <In Korea> , became popular in the academic circle thanks to the Korean scholars who started studying them in mid-20th century. These three books transcribed the Mongolian colloquial language of that period in both classical Mongolian and hangul, and therefore, are significant documents of not only the Mongolian but also of Korean as well. In particular, the distinctive characteristics of Mongolian No-geol-dae (蒙語老乞大) is that it’s a text of real-life dialogues, and the colloquial pronunciations are often directly notated. Elements of the letters such as d (ㄷ) and t (ㅌ) as well as ö (워) and ü (우), which were notated by the same letter forms in the Mongolian scripture of that period, were distinguished by the Korean transcription. There are many interesting aspects of phonology that occur even when only comparing the Mongolian No-geol-dae’s classical Mongolian spelling to its Hangul transcript. Professor Lee Ki Moon (1964), in his research of Mongolian No-geol-dae, raised many issues concerning comparisons with features of phonology in Beijing Geser. One of them is the question of which Mongolian dialect the Mongolian No-geol-dae (蒙語老乞大) is based on. He compared it to the vocabulary of various dialects of Mongolian language and concluded that there was Ordus dialect influence. In this paper sought to find an answer to this question by comparing non-written Mongolian (words that directly indicate colloquial characteristics) and some grammatical forms recorded in Mongolian No-geol-dae to modern Mongolian dialects.
Солонгос-Монголын дипломат харилцааны 30 жилд Хэл шинжлэлийн салбарын академик судалгааны үр дүнг дүгнэн бичив.
The language features of Xinjiang Oirats moved from nomadic to settled culture: a case of idioms and idiomatic expressions
Монгол-солонгосын хэл, соёлын харилцааны түүх
The paper aims at introducing the language status and explaining the language features of Xinjiang Oirats while exploring the semantic and lexical changes in idioms and idiomatic expressions and culture of two dialects in one culture. The features of national mentality are commonly emerged in the language which is considered as a component of national culture and national character, and more specifically, it is usually interpreted by the idioms and idiomatic expressions. A study on idioms plays a prominent role in the studies on Mongolian Lexicology. Not only it clarifies, explains and identifies the features of national mentality, but also more recent studies have been conducted on the comparison and contrast of idioms in two languages. Historically speaking, the social disintegration in Mongolia created differences in language dialects of Mongolian ethnic groups. Some of Mongolian nomads had moved to the settled culture earlier than ever before. The main objective of the study is to clarify what the distinctive features of languages and cultures in which the speakers of two different cultures live and interact with each other. The cases of two dialects are investigated and the most commonly used idioms and idiomatic expressions are examined in this study.
Classical Mongolian has preserved its early historical features so it`s important to study and compare its form with other Altaic languages. There are differing theories on the Altaic language roots and this research won`t touch upon that but will only aim to compare classical Mongolian with the corresponding Turkic words based on orthography.
