North Asia (Siberia)
East Asia (Far East)
|Linguistic classification||One of the world's primary language families|
The Turkic languages are a language family of at least thirty-five documented languages, spoken by the Turkic peoples of Eurasia from Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and West Asia all the way to North Asia (particularly in Siberia) and East Asia. The Turkic languages originated in a region of East Asia spanning Western China to Mongolia, where Proto-Turkic is thought to have been spoken, according to one estimate, around 2,500 years ago, from where they expanded to Central Asia and farther west during the first millennium.
Turkic languages are spoken as a native language by some 170 million people, and the total number of Turkic speakers, including second language speakers, is over 200 million. The Turkic language with the greatest number of speakers is Turkish, spoken mainly in Anatolia and the Balkans; its native speakers account for about 40% of all Turkic speakers.
Characteristic features of Turkish, such as vowel harmony, agglutination, and lack of grammatical gender, are universal within the Turkic family. There is also a high degree of mutual intelligibility among the various Oghuz languages, which include Turkish, Azerbaijani, Turkmen, Qashqai, Gagauz, Balkan Gagauz Turkish, and Oghuz-influenced Crimean Tatar. Although methods of classification vary, the Turkic languages are usually considered to be divided equally into two branches: Oghur, the only surviving member of which is Chuvash, and Common Turkic, which includes all other Turkic languages including the Oghuz subbranch.
Turkic languages show some similarities with the Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic, and Japonic languages. These similarities led some linguists to propose an Altaic language family, though this proposal is not widely accepted. Apparent similarities with the Uralic languages family even caused these families to be regarded as one for a long time under the hypothesis of Ural-Altaic languages. However, there has not been sufficient evidence to conclude the existence of either of these macrofamilies, the shared characteristics between the languages being attributed presently to extensive prehistoric language contact.
Turkic languages are null-subject languages, have vowel harmony, extensive agglutination by means of suffixes and postpositions, and lack of grammatical articles, noun classes, and grammatical gender. Subject–object–verb word order is universal within the family. The root of a word is basically of one, two or three consonants.
Extensive contact took place between Proto-Turks and Proto-Mongols approximately during the first millennium BC; the shared cultural tradition between the two Eurasian nomadic groups is called the "Turco-Mongol" tradition. The two groups shared a religion, Tengrism, and there exists a multitude of evident loanwords between Turkic languages and Mongolic languages. Although the loans were bidirectional, today Turkic loanwords constitute the largest foreign component in Mongolian vocabulary. The most famous of these loanwords include "lion" (Turkish: aslan or arslan; Mongolian: arslan), "gold" (Turkish: altın; Mongolian: altan or alt), and "iron" (Turkish: demir; Mongolian: tömör).
Some lexical and extensive typological similarities between Turkic and the nearby Tungusic and Mongolic families, as well as the Korean and Japonic families (all formerly widely considered to be part of the so-called Altaic language family) has in more recent years been instead attributed to prehistoric contact amongst the group, sometimes referred to as the Northeast Asian sprachbund. A more recent (circa first millennium BCE) contact between "core Altaic" (Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic) is distinguished from this, due to the existence of definitive common words that appear to have been mostly borrowed from Turkic into Mongolic, and later from Mongolic into Tungusic, as Turkic borrowings into Mongolic significantly outnumber Mongolic borrowings into Turkic, and Turkic and Tungusic do not share any words that do not also exist in Mongolic.
Alexander Vovin (2004, 2010) notes that Old Turkic had borrowed some words from the Ruan-ruan language (the language of the Rouran Khaganate), which Vovin considers to be an extinct non-Altaic language that is not related to any modern-day language.
Early written records
The first established records of the Turkic languages are the eighth century AD Orkhon inscriptions by the Göktürks, recording the Old Turkic language, which were discovered in 1889 in the Orkhon Valley in Mongolia. The Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Divânü Lügati't-Türk), written during the 11th century AD by Kaşgarlı Mahmud of the Kara-Khanid Khanate, constitutes an early linguistic treatment of the family. The Compendium is the first comprehensive dictionary of the Turkic languages and also includes the first known map of the Turkic speakers' geographical distribution. It mainly pertains to the Southwestern branch of the family.
The Codex Cumanicus (12th–13th centuries AD) concerning the Northwestern branch is another early linguistic manual, between the Kipchak language and Latin, used by the Catholic missionaries sent to the Western Cumans inhabiting a region corresponding to present-day Hungary and Romania. The earliest records of the language spoken by Volga Bulgars, the parent to today's Chuvash language, are dated to the 13th–14th centuries AD.
Geographical expansion and development
With the Turkic expansion during the Early Middle Ages (c. 6th–11th centuries AD), Turkic languages, in the course of just a few centuries, spread across Central Asia, from Siberia to the Mediterranean. Various terminologies from the Turkic languages have passed into Persian, Hindustani, Russian, Chinese, and to a lesser extent, Arabic.
For centuries, the Turkic-speaking peoples have migrated extensively and intermingled continuously, and their languages have been influenced mutually and through contact with the surrounding languages, especially the Iranian, Slavic, and Mongolic languages.
This has obscured the historical developments within each language and/or language group, and as a result, there exist several systems to classify the Turkic languages. The modern genetic classification schemes for Turkic are still largely indebted to Samoilovich (1922).
- Common Turkic
- Oghur Turkic
In this classification, Oghur Turkic is also referred to as Lir-Turkic, and the other branches are subsumed under the title of Shaz-Turkic or Common Turkic. It is not clear when these two major types of Turkic can be assumed to have actually diverged.
Geographically and linguistically, the languages of the Northwestern and Southeastern subgroups belong to the central Turkic languages, while the Northeastern and Khalaj languages are the so-called peripheral languages.
The following isoglosses are traditionally used in the classification of the Turkic languages:
- Rhotacism (or in some views, zetacism), e.g. in the last consonant of the word for "nine" *tokkuz. This separates the Oghur branch, which exhibits /r/, from the rest of Turkic, which exhibits /z/. In this case, rhotacism refers to the development of *-/r/, *-/z/, and *-/d/ to /r/,*-/k/,*-/kh/ in this branch. See Antonov and Jacques (2012) on the debate concerning rhotacism and lambdacism in Turkic.
- Intervocalic *d, e.g. the second consonant in the word for "foot" *hadaq
- Word-final -G, e.g. in the word for "mountain" *tāg
- Suffix-final -G, e.g. in the suffix *lIG, in e.g. *tāglïg
Additional isoglosses include:
- Preservation of word initial *h, e.g. in the word for "foot" *hadaq. This separates Khalaj as a peripheral language.
- Denasalisation of palatal *ń, e.g. in the word for "moon", *āń
*In the standard Istanbul dialect of Turkish, the ğ in dağ and dağlı is not realized as a consonant, but as a slight lengthening of the preceding vowel.
The following is a brief comparison of cognates among the basic vocabulary across the Turkic language family (about 60 words).
Empty cells do not necessarily imply that a particular language is lacking a word to describe the concept, but rather that the word for the concept in that language may be formed from another stem and is not a cognate with the other words in the row or that a loanword is used in its place.
Also, there may be shifts in the meaning from one language to another, and so the "Common meaning" given is only approximate. In some cases the form given is found only in some dialects of the language, or a loanword is much more common (e.g. in Turkish, the preferred word for "fire" is the Persian-derived ateş, whereas the native od is dead). Forms are given in native Latin orthographies unless otherwise noted.
|Common meaning||Proto-Turkic||Old Turkic||Turkish||Azerbaijani||Qashqai||Turkmen||Tatar||Bashkir||Kazakh||Kyrgyz||Uzbek||Uyghur||Sakha/Yakut||Chuvash|
|-||father, ancestor||*ata, *kaŋ||ata, apa, qaŋ||baba, ata||baba, ata||bowa/ata||ata||ata, atay||ata, atay||ata||ata||ota||ata||ata||atte, aśu, aşşe|
|mother||*ana, *ög||ana, ög||ana, anne||ana||ana/nänä||ene||ana, äni||ana, inä(y)/asay||ana||ene||ona||ana||iye||anne, annü, amăşĕ|
|man||*ēr, *érkek||er||erkek||ər/erkək||kiši||erkek||ir||ir, irkäk||er, erkek||erkek||erkak||er||er||ar/arşın|
|person||*kiĺi, *yạlaŋuk||kiši, yalaŋuq||kişi||kişi||kişi||keşe||keşe||kisi||kişi||kishi||kishi||kihi||şın|
|mother-in-law||kaynana||qaynana||qäynänä||gaýyn ene||qayın ana||qäynä||qayın ene||kaynene||qaynona||qeyinana||huńama|
|hair||*s(i)ač, *kïl||sač, qïl||saç, kıl||saç, qıl||tik/qel||saç, gyl||çäç, qıl||säs, qıl||şaş, qıl||çaç, kıl||soch, qil||sach, qil||as, kıl||śüś, hul|
|knee||*dīŕ, *dǖŕ||tiz||diz||diz||diz||dyz||tez||teð||tize||tize||tizza||tiz||tühex||çĕrśi, çerkuśśi|
|cattle||*dabar||ingek, tabar||inek, davar, sığır||inək, sığır||seğer||sygyr||sıyır||hıyır||sïır||sıyır||sigir||siyir||ınax||ĕne|
|dog||*ït, *köpek||ït||it, köpek||it||kepäg||it||et||et||ït||it||it||it||ıt||yıtă|
|Other nouns||house||*eb, *bark||eb, barq||ev, bark||ev||äv||öý||öy||öy||üy, yort||üy||uy||öy||śurt|
|tent||*otag, *gerekü||otaɣ, kerekü||çadır, otağ||çadır; otaq||čador||çadyr; otag||çatır||satır||şatır; otaw||çatır||chodir; oʻtoq||chadir; otaq||otuu||çatăr|
|fire||*ōt||ōt||od, ateş (Pers.)||od||ot||ot||ut||ut||ot||ot||oʻt||ot||uot||vut/vot|
|sun/day||*gün, *güneĺ||kün||güneş, gün||günəş, gün||gin/gün||gün||qoyaş, kön||qoyaş, kön||kün||kün||quyosh, kun||quyash, kün||kün||hĕvel, kun|
|god (Tengri)||*teŋri, *taŋrï||teŋri, burqan||tanrı||tanrı||tarï/Allah/Xoda||taňry||täñre||täñre||täñiri||teñir||tangri||tengri||tanara||tură/toră|
|sky||*teŋri, *kȫk||kök, teŋri||gök||göy||gey/göy||gök||kük||kük||kök||kök||koʻk||kök||küöx||kăvak/koak|
|white||*āk, *ürüŋ||āq, ürüŋ||ak, beyaz (Ar.)||ağ||aq||ak||aq||aq||aq||ak||oq||aq|
|black||*kara||qara||kara, siyah (Pers.)||qara||qärä||gara||qara||qara||qara||kara||qora||qara||xara||hura, hora|
|red||*kïŕïl||qïzïl||kızıl, kırmızı (Ar.)||qızıl||qïzïl||gyzyl||qızıl||qıðıl||qızıl||kızıl||qizil||qizil||kıhıl||hĕrlĕ|
|10||*ōn||on||on||on||on||on||un||un||on||on||oʻn||on||uon||vunnă, vună, vun|
Endangered Turkic languages
An endangered language, or moribund language, is a language that is at risk of falling out of use as its speakers die out or shift to speaking another language. Language loss occurs when the language has no more native speakers and becomes a "dead language".
15 Turkic languages exist in endangered languages in Russia:
- Altai language / Northern Altay language – Severely endangered – speakers 55,720
- Baraba Tatar language – Severely endangered – speakers 8,000
- Bashkir language – Vulnerable – speakers 1,200,000
- Chulym language – Critically endangered – speakers 44
- Chuvash language – Vulnerable – speakers 1,042,989
- Dolgan language – Definitely endangered – speakers 1,100
- Karachay-Balkar language – Vulnerable – speakers 310,000
- Khakas language – Definitely endangered – speakers 43,000
- Kumyk language – Vulnerable – speakers 450,000
- Nogai language / Yurt Tatar language – Definitely endangered – speakers 87,000
- Shor language – Severely endangered – speakers 2,800
- Siberian Tatar language – Definitely endangered – speakers 100,000
- Tofa language – Critically endangered – speakers 93
- Tuvan language – Vulnerable – speakers 280,000
- Tatar language – Vulnerable – speakers 5 200,000
- Yakut language – Vulnerable – speakers 450,000
In Qinghai (Amdo), the Salar language has a heavy Chinese and Tibetan influence. Although of Turkic origin, major linguistic structures have been absorbed from Chinese. Around 20% of the vocabulary is of Chinese origin, and 10% is also of Tibetan origin. Yet the official Communist Chinese government policy deliberately covers up these influences in academic and linguistics studies, trying to emphasize the Turkic element and completely ignoring the Chinese in the Salar language. The Salar language has taken loans and influence from neighboring varieties of Chinese. It is neighboring variants of Chinese which have loaned words to the Salar language. In Qinghai, many Salar men speak both the Qinghai dialect of Chinese and Salar. Rural Salars can speak Salar fluently while urban Salars often assimilate into the Chinese speaking Hui population.
Ethnologue and ISO list an Iranian language "Khalaj" with the same population, but Glottolog states it does not exist. The Khalaj speak their Turkic language and Persian, and the supposed Iranian language of the Khalaj is spurious.
Khorasani Turkic (Khorasani Turkic: خراسان تركچىسى, Pronunciation: [xorɑsɑn tyrktʃesi]; Persian: Zebān-e Torkī-ye Xorāsānī زبان ترکی خراسانی) is an Oghuz Turkic language spoken in northern North Khorasan Province and Razavi Khorasan Province in Iran. Nearly all Khorasani Turkic speakers are also bilingual in Persian.
Many Turkic languages have gone extinct in Afghanistan.
In 1980, Saddam Hussein's government adopted a policy of assimilation of its minorities. Due to government relocation programs, thousands of Iraqi Turkmen were relocated from their traditional homelands in northern Iraq and replaced by Arabs, in an effort to Arabize the region. Furthermore, Iraqi Turkmen villages and towns were destroyed to make way for Arab migrants, who were promised free land and financial incentives. For example, the Ba'th regime recognised that the city of Kirkuk was historically an Iraqi Arab city and remained firmly in its cultural orientation. Thus, the first wave of Arabization saw Arab families move from the centre and south of Iraq into Kirkuk to work in the expanding oil industry. Although the Iraqi Turkmen were not actively forced out, new Arab quarters were established in the city and the overall demographic balance of the city changed as the Arab migrations continued.
Several presidential decrees and directives from state security and intelligence organizations indicate that the Iraqi Turkmen were a particular focus of attention during the assimilation process during the Ba'th regime. For example, the Iraqi Military Intelligence issued directive 1559 on 6 May 1980 ordering the deportation of Iraqi Turkmen officials from Kirkuk, issuing the following instructions: "identify the places where Turkmen officials are working in governmental offices [in order] to deport them to other governorates in order to disperse them and prevent them from concentrating in this governorate [Kirkuk]". In addition, on 30 October 1981, the Revolution's Command Council issued decree 1391, which authorized the deportation of Iraqi Turkmen from Kiruk with paragraph 13 noting that "this directive is specially aimed at Turkmen and Kurdish officials and workers who are living in Kirkuk".
As primary victims of these Arabization policies, the Iraqi Turkmen suffered from land expropriation and job discrimination, and therefore would register themselves as "Arabs" in order to avoid discrimination. Thus, ethnic cleansing was an element of the Ba'thist policy aimed at reducing the influence of the Iraqi Turkmen in northern Iraq's Kirkuk. Those Iraqi Turkmen who remained in cities such as Kirkuk were subject to continued assimilation policies; school names, neighbourhoods, villages, streets, markets and even mosques with names of Turkic origin were changed to names that emanated from the Ba'th Party or from Arab heroes. Moreover, many Iraqi Turkmen villages and neighbourhoods in Kirkuk were simply demolished, particularly in the 1990s.
- Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds. (2017). "Turkic". Glottolog 3.0. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
- Dybo A.V., Chronology of Türkic languages and linguistic contacts of early Türks, Moskow, 2007, p. 766, "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2005-03-11. Retrieved 2005-03-11. (In Russian)
- Janhunen, Juha (2013). "Personal pronouns in Core Altaic". In Martine Irma Robbeets; Hubert Cuyckens. Shared Grammaticalization: With Special Focus on the Transeurasian Languages. p. 223.
- Katzner, Kenneth (March 2002). Languages of the World, Third Edition. Routledge, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Books Ltd. ISBN 978-0-415-25004-7.
- Brigitte Moser, Michael Wilhelm Weithmann, Landeskunde Türkei: Geschichte, Gesellschaft und Kultur, Buske Publishing, 2008, p.173
- Deutsches Orient-Institut, Orient, Vol. 41, Alfred Röper Publushing, 2000, p.611
- "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2014-01-16. Retrieved 2014-01-15.
- "Language Materials Project: Turkish". UCLA International Institute, Center for World Languages. February 2007. Retrieved 2007-04-26.
- Sinor, 1988, p.710
- George van DRIEM: Handbuch der Orientalistik. Volume 1 Part 10. BRILL 2001. Page 336
- M. A. Castrén, Nordische Reisen und Forschungen. V, St.-Petersburg, 1849
- Turkic Language tree entries provide the information on the Turkic-speaking regions.
- Clark, Larry V. (1980). "Turkic Loanwords in Mongol, I:The Treatment of Non-initial S, Z, Š, Č". Central Asiatic Journal. 24: 36–59.
- Vovin, Alexander 2004. ‘Some Thoughts on the Origins of the Old Turkic 12-Year Animal Cycle.’ Central Asiatic Journal 48/1: 118–32.
- Vovin, Alexander. 2010. Once Again on the Ruan-ruan Language. Ötüken’den İstanbul’a Türkçenin 1290 Yılı (720–2010) Sempozyumu From Ötüken to Istanbul, 1290 Years of Turkish (720–2010). 3–5 Aralık 2010, İstanbul / 3–5 December 2010, İstanbul: 1–10.
- Soucek, Svat (March 2000). A History of Inner Asia. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-65169-1.
- Findley, Carter V. (October 2004). The Turks in World History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-517726-6.
- Johanson, Lars (2001). "Discoveries on the Turkic linguistic map" (PDF). Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul. Retrieved 2007-03-18.
- Lars Johanson, The History of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds), The Turkic Languages, London, New York: Routledge, 81–125, 1998.Classification of Turkic languages
- See the main article on Lir-Turkic.
- Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.) (2005). "Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Fifteenth edition. Language Family Trees – Turkic". Retrieved 2007-03-18. The reliability of Ethnologue lies mainly in its statistics whereas its framework for the internal classification of Turkic is still based largely on Baskakov (1962) and the collective work in Deny et al. (1959–1964). A more up to date alternative to classifying these languages on internal camparative grounds is to be found in the work of Johanson and his co-workers.
- Hruschka, Daniel J., Simon Branford, Eric D. Smith, Jon Wilkins, Andrew Meade, Mark Pagel, Tanmoy Bhattacharya (2014). Detecting Regular Sound Changes in Linguistics as Events of Concerted Evolution. Current Biology, Volume 25, Issue 1, 1-9. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.064
- Самойлович, А. Н. (1922). Некоторые дополнения к классификации турецких языков (in Russian).
- Larry Clark, "Chuvash", in The Turkic Languages, eds. Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (London–NY: Routledge, 2006), 434–452.
- Anton Antonov & Guillaume Jacques, "Turkic kümüš ‘silver’ and the lambdaism vs sigmatism debate", Turkic Languages 15, no. 2 (2012): 151–70.
- Lars Johanson (1998) The History of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató (eds) The Turkic Languages. London, New York: Routledge, 81–125.
- Khalaj is surrounded by Oghuz languages, but exhibits a number of features that classify it as non-Oghuz.
- Crimean Tatar and Urum are historically Kipchak languages, but have been heavily influenced by Oghuz languages.
- Tura, Baraba, Tomsk, Tümen, Ishim, Irtysh, Tobol, Tara, etc. are partly of different origin (Johanson 1998)
- "turcologica". Retrieved 22 February 2017.
- Deviating. Historically developed from Southwestern (Oghuz) (Johanson 1998)
- Aini contains a very large Persian vocabulary component, and is spoken exclusively by adult men, almost as a cryptolect.
- Coene 2009, p. 75
- Coene 2009, p. 75
- Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World. Contributors Keith Brown, Sarah Ogilvie (revised ed.). Elsevier. 2010. p. 1109. ISBN 0080877753. Retrieved 24 April 2014.
- Johanson, Lars, ed. (1998). The Mainz Meeting: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, August 3–6, 1994. Turcologica Series. Contributor Éva Ágnes Csató. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. p. 28. ISBN 3447038640. Retrieved 24 April 2014.
- Johanson, Lars; Utas, Bo, eds. (2000). Evidentials: Turkic, Iranian and Neighbouring Languages. Volume 24 of Empirical approaches to language typology. Walter de Gruyter. p. 58. ISBN 3110161583. ISSN 0933-761X. Retrieved 24 April 2014.
- William Safran (1998). William Safran, ed. Nationalism and ethnoregional identities in China. Volume 1 of Cass series—nationalism and ethnicity (illustrated ed.). Psychology Press. p. 72. ISBN 0-7146-4921-X. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
- Raymond Hickey (2010). Raymond Hickey, ed. The Handbook of Language Contact (illustrated ed.). John Wiley and Sons. p. 664. ISBN 1-4051-7580-X. Retrieved 2010-06-28.
- Dwyer (2007:90)
- Khalaj (Iranian) at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015)
- Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds. (2017). "Khalaj (Iranian)". Glottolog 3.0. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
- Hammarström (2015) Ethnologue 16/17/18th editions: a comprehensive review: online appendices
- "Ethnologue report for Khorasani Turkic"
- Jenkins 2008, 15.
- Anderson & Stansfield 2009, 64.
- Anderson & Stansfield 2009, 65.
- International Crisis Group 2006, 5.
- Anderson & Stansfield 2009, 66.
- Akhatov G. Kh. 1960. "About the stress in the language of the Siberian Tatars in connection with the stress of modern Tatar literary language" .- Sat *"Problems of Turkic and the history of Russian Oriental Studies." Kazan. (in Russian)
- Akhatov G.Kh. 1963. "Dialect West Siberian Tatars" (monograph). Ufa. (in Russian)
- Baskakov, N.A. 1962, 1969. Introduction to the study of the Turkic languages. Moscow. (in Russian)
- Boeschoten, Hendrik & Lars Johanson. 2006. Turkic languages in contact. Turcologica, Bd. 61. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ISBN 3-447-05212-0
- Clausen, Gerard. 1972. An etymological dictionary of pre-thirteenth-century Turkish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Deny, Jean et al. 1959–1964. Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
- Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2016. Parlons qashqay. In: collection "parlons". Paris: L'Harmattan.
- Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2016. Le qashqay: langue turcique d'Iran. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (online).
- Dolatkhah, Sohrab. 2015. Qashqay Folktales. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (online).
- Johanson, Lars & Éva Agnes Csató (ed.). 1998. The Turkic languages. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-08200-5.
- Johanson, Lars. 1998. "The history of Turkic." In: Johanson & Csató, pp. 81–125.
- Johanson, Lars. 1998. "Turkic languages." In: Encyclopædia Britannica. CD 98. Encyclopædia Britannica Online, 5 sept. 2007.
- Menges, K. H. 1968. The Turkic languages and peoples: An introduction to Turkic studies. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
- Öztopçu, Kurtuluş. 1996. Dictionary of the Turkic languages: English, Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Tatar, Turkish, Turkmen, Uighur, Uzbek. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-14198-2
- Samoilovich, A. N. 1922. Some additions to the classification of the Turkish languages. Petrograd.
- Schönig, Claus. 1997–1998. "A new attempt to classify the Turkic languages I-III." Turkic Languages 1:1.117–133, 1:2.262–277, 2:1.130–151.
- Starostin, Sergei A., Anna V. Dybo, and Oleg A. Mudrak. 2003. Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 90-04-13153-1
- Voegelin, C.F. & F.M. Voegelin. 1977. Classification and index of the World's languages. New York: Elsevier.
- Turkic Languages Verb Comparison
- Turkic Inscriptions of Orkhon Valley, Mongolia
- Turkic Languages: Resources – University of Michigan
- Map of Turkic languages
- Classification of Turkic Languages
- Online Uyghur–English Dictionary
- Turkic languages at Curlie (based on DMOZ)
- Turkic language vocabulary comparison tool / dictionary
- A Comparative Dictionary of Turkic Languages Open Project
- The Turkic Languages in a Nutshell with illustrations.
- Swadesh lists of Turkic basic vocabulary words (from Wiktionary's Swadesh-list appendix)
- Conferences on Turkic languages processing: Astana, Kazakhstan, 2013, Istanbul, Turkey, 2014, Kazan, Tatarstan, 2015