The writing system for the Chuvash language is based on theCyrillic script, employing all of the letters used in theRussian alphabet and adding four letters of its own:Ӑ,Ӗ,Ҫ andӲ.
Chuvash is the native language of theChuvash people and an official language ofChuvashia.[6][7] There are contradictory numbers regarding the number of people able to speak Chuvash nowadays; some sources claim it is spoken by 1,640,000 persons in Russia and another 34,000 in other countries[8] and that 86% of ethnic Chuvash and 8% of the people of other ethnicities living in Chuvashia claimed knowledge of Chuvash language during the2002 census.[9] However, other sources claim that the number of Chuvash speakers is on the decline, with a drop from 1 million speakers in 2010 to 700,000 in 2021; observers suggest this is due to Moscow having a lack of interest in preserving the language diversity in Russia.[10] Although Chuvash is taught at schools and sometimes used in the media, it is consideredendangered by theUNESCO,[11][12] becauseRussian dominates in most spheres of life and few children learning the language are likely to become active users.
A fairly significant production and publication of literature in Chuvash still continues. According to UNESCO'sIndex Translationum, at least 202 books translated from Chuvash were published in other languages (mostly Russian) since ca. 1979.[13] However, as with most other languages of the formerUSSR, most of the translation activity took place before thedissolution of the USSR: out of the 202 translations, 170 books were published in the USSR[14] and just 17, in the post-1991 Russia (mostly, in the 1990s).[15] A similar situation takes place with the translation of books from other languages (mostly Russian) into Chuvash (the total of 175 titles published since ca. 1979, but just 18 of them in post-1991 Russia).[16]
Chuvash is the most distinctive of theTurkic languages and cannot be understood by other Turkic speakers, whose languages have varying degrees ofmutual intelligibility within their respective subgroups. Chuvash is classified, alongside the long-extinctBulgar, as a member of theOghuric branch of the Turkic language family, or equivalently, the sole surviving descendant of West Old Turkic.[17] Since the surviving literary records for the non-Chuvash members of Oghuric (Bulgar and possiblyKhazar) are scant, the exact position of Chuvash within the Oghuric family cannot be determined.
Despite grammatical similarity with the rest of Turkic language family, the presence of changes in Chuvash pronunciation (which are hard to reconcile with other members of the Turkic family) has led some scholars to see Chuvash as originating not from Proto-Turkic but from another proto-language spoken at the time of Proto-Turkic (in which case Chuvash and all the remaining Turkic languages would be part of a larger language family).[18]
Italian historian and philologistIgor de Rachewiltz noted a significant distinction of the Chuvash language from other Turkic languages. According to him, the Chuvash language does not share certain common characteristics with Turkic languages to such a degree that some scholars consider Chuvash as an independent branch from Turkic and Mongolic. The Turkic classification of Chuvash was seen as a compromise solution for classification purposes.[19][b]
The Oghuric branch is distinguished from the rest of the Turkic family (theCommon Turkic languages) by twosound changes:r corresponding to Common Turkicz andl corresponding to Common Turkicš.[20] The first scientific fieldwork description of Chuvash, byAugust Ahlqvist in 1856, allowed researchers to establish its proper affiliation.[21]
Some scholars suggestHunnish had strong ties with Chuvash[22] and classify Chuvash as separate Hunno-Bulgar.[23] However, such speculations are not based on proper linguistic evidence, since the language of the Huns is almost unknown except for a few attested words and personal names. Scholars generally consider Hunnish as unclassifiable.[24][25][26][27] Chuvash is so divergent from the main body of Turkic languages that some scholars formerly considered Chuvash to be aUralic language.[28] Conversely, other scholars today regard it as an Oghuric language significantly influenced by theFinno-Ugric languages.[29]
The following sound changes and resulting sound correspondences are typical:[30][31]
*a > *å >o >u (the latter only in the Anatri dialect, on which the standard is based);
but also (the determining circumstances are unclear):
*a >ï
ут (ut) : Turkishat 'horse'
ҫыр (şyr) : Turkishyaz 'write'
raising of most other low vowels: *ẹ >i, *o >u, *ö >ü
кил (kil) : Turkishgel 'come', утӑ (utӑ) : Turkishot 'grass'
*e (i.e. *ä) >a
кас (kas) : Turkishkes 'cut'
Allophonic rules: voicing between voiced segments,
palatalisation of consonants in palatal environments,
leftward stress retraction from reduced vowels
SeePhonology section.
Most of the (non-allophonic) consonant changes listed in the table above are thought to date from the period before theBulgars migrated to theVolga region in the 10th century; some notable exceptions are theč >ś shift and the final stage of the-d >-ð >-z >-r shift, which date from the following, Volga Bulgar period (between the 10th-century migration and the Mongol invasions of the 13th century). The vowel changes mostly occurred later, mainly during the Middle Chuvash period (between the invasions and the 17th century), except for the diphthongisation, which took place during the Volga Bulgar period. Many sound changes known from Chuvash can be observed in Turkic loanwords into Hungarian (from the pre-migration period) and in Volga Bulgar epitaphs or loanwords into languages of the Volga region (from the Volga Bulgar period). Nevertheless, these sources also indicate that there was significant dialectal variation within the Oguric-speaking population during both of these periods.[31]
In the 8-10th centuries in Central Asia, the ancient Turkic script (theOrkhon-Yenisei runic script) was used for writing in Turkic languages. Turkic epitaphs of 7-9th centuries AD were left by speakers of various dialects (table):
Often in the Chuvash language, the Common Turkic sounds of/j/ (Oghuz),/d/ (Karluk),/z/ (Kipchak) are replaced by/r/, examplerhotacism:
Words for "leg" and "put" in various Turkic languages:
j - languages (Oguz):ayaq, qoy-
d - languages (Karluk):adaq, qod-
z - languages (Kypchak):azaq, qoz-
r - languages (Oghur):ura, hur- (dial. ora, hor-)[32]
Often in the Chuvash language, the Turkic sound/q/ is replaced by/x/, examplehitaism:
In the field of vowels, we observe the following correspondences: the common Turkic-a- in the first syllable of the word in Chuvash correspond to-u- and-o-.
It is well known that theOghuz group of Turkic languages differs from theKipchak in that the word “I” was pronounced by theOghuzes andOghurs in ancient times by "bä(n)", and the rest of the Turks - by "män". There is such a difference in the modern Turkic languages of the Volga region:
The linguistic landscape of the Chuvash language is quite homogeneous, and the differences between dialects are insignificant. Currently, the differences between dialects becoming more and more leveled out.[33]
Researchers distinguish three main dialects:
Upper dialect (Turi, Viryal) - upstream of the Sura, preserves the /o/ sound in words likeot "horse"
Middle dialect (mixed, transitional);
Lower dialect (Anatri) - downstream of the Sura, changes the /o/ sound to /u/ in words likeut "horse"
TheMalokarachinsky dialect is designated as occupying a separate position.
The literary language is based on both the Lower and Upper dialects. BothTatar and the neighbouringUralic languages such asMari have influenced the Chuvash language, as haveRussian,Arabic andPersian, which have all added many words to the Chuvash lexicon.
All dialects established to date have their own sub-dialects, which have their own exceptional features and peculiarities, thereby they are divided into even smaller dialect forms. The following dialect ramifications in the Chuvash language have been identified:
1) as part of the upper dialect, the subdialects are: a) Sundyrsky; b) Morgaussko-Yadrinsky; c) Krasnochetaysky; d) Cheboksary; e) Kalininsko-Alikovsky;
2) in the zone of the middle dialect: a) Malocivilsky; b) Urmarsky; c) civil-marposadsky;
3) in the zone of the grassroots dialect: a) Buin-Simbirsk; b) Nurlatsky (prichemshanye);
Phonetic differences:
a) All words of the Upper dialect (except exc. Kalinin-Alikov subgroup) in the initial syllable, instead of the "lower" sound -U- is used -O- for example:
In English:yes, six, found
in Turi:por, olttă, toprăm
in Anatri:pur, ulttă, tuprăm
b) In the upper dialect in the Sundyr sub-dialect, instead of the sound -ü- (used in all other dialects), the sound -ö- is used, which is a correlative soft pair of the posterior -o-, for example:
in English:hut, back, broth
in Turi:pӧrt, tӧrt, šӧrpe
in Anatri:pürt, türt, šürpe
с) In the upper dialect (in most sub-dialects) the loss of the sound -j- before the sonorant -l-, -n-, -r- and stop -t- is characterized, which in turn entails palatalization of these consonants, for example:
in English:russian woman, choose
in Turi:mar'a, sul'l'a
in Anatri:majra, sujla
d) In the higher dialect (for most sub-dialects),gemination of intervocalic consonants is characteristic, as in the Finnish language, for example:
in English:shawl, drunk, crooked
in Turi:tottăr, ĕssĕr, kokkăr
in Anatri:tutăr, üsĕr, kukăr
In general,gemination itself is the norm for the Chuvash language, since many historically root words in both dialects contain gemination, for example:anne (mather), atte (father), piççe (brother), appa (sister), kukka (uncle), pĕrre (one), ikkĕ (two), vişşĕ (three), tăvattă (four), pillĕk (five), ulttă (six), şiççĕ (seven), sakkăr (eight), tăhhăr (nine), vunnă (ten), etc. Some linguists are inclined to assume that this is the influence of theVolga Finns at the turn of the 7th century when the ancestors of the Chuvash moved to the Volga, there are those who disagree with this statement. In one of the subgroups of the Trans-Kama Chuvash, in the same words there is no gemination at all, for example, the word father is pronounced as Adi, and mother as Ani, their counting looks like this:pĕr, ik, viş, tvat, pül, ulta, şiç, sagăr, tăgăr, vun - but many scientists assume that this is a consequence of the influence of the Tatar language. They also have many words in the Tatar style, the word “hare - kuşana” (tat.kuyan) is “mulkaç” for everyone, “pancakes - kuymak” for the rest is ikerçĕ, “cat - pĕşi” for the rest is “saş”, etc.
e) In the middle and upper dialects there are rounded vowels -ă°-, -ĕ°- (pronounced with the lips rounded and slightly pulled forward), in the lower dialect this is not observed, here they correspond to the standard sounds -ă-, -ĕ-.
f) In the upper and lower dialects, consonantism is distinguished by the pronunciation of the affricate sound -ç-. Among the upper Chuvash and speakers of the middle dialect, the sound -ç- is almost no different from the pronunciation of the Russian affricate; in the lower dialect it is heard almost like a soft -ç-, as in the Tatar language.
Morphological differences:
a) In the upper dialect there are synharmonic variants of the plural affix-sam/-sem, and in the lower dialect only-sem, for example:
in English:horses, sheep, meadows, cows, flowers
in Turi:lašasam, surăhsam, şaramsam, ĕnesem, çeçeksem
in Anatri:lašasem, surăhsem, şeremsem, ĕnesem, çeçeksem
b) In the upper dialect (in most sub-dialects) the affix of the possessive case is-yăn (-yĕn), the dative case is-ya (-ye), while in the lower dialect-năn (-nĕn, -n), -na (-ne), For example:
in Turi:lašayăn, ĕneyĕn, lašaya, ĕneya, ĕneye
in Anatri:lašan(ăn), ĕnen(ĕn), lašana, ĕnene
c) in the upper dialect, affixes of belonging, with the exception of the 3rd person affix-i (-ĕ), have almost fallen out of use or are used extremely rarely. In the latter case, the 2nd person affix-u (-ü) of the upper dialect usually corresponds to-ă (-ĕ) in the lower dialect;
in English:your head, your daughter
in Turi:san puşu, san hĕrü
in Anatri:san puşă, san hĕrĕ
There is also a mixed type
d) In the upper dialect, thegemination of the temporal index-t- and-p- is used in the affixes of the 2nd person plural of the verb of the present tense, for example:
in English:are you reading, we are going
in Turi:esĕr vulattăr, epĕr pırappăr
in Anatri:esir vulatăr, epir pırappăr
The influence of Russian:we are going < epir pıratpăr
There is also a mixed type, as already mentioned above.
e) In the upper dialect, the affix of the possibility of verbs-ay (-ey), due to contraction,monophtongized to-i:
in English:Couldn't tell, couldn't find out
in Turi:kalimarăm, pĕlimarăm, pĕlimerĕm
in Anatri:kalaymarăm, pĕleymerĕm
f) In the upper dialect, the synharmonic variant of the interrogative particle-i is common, in the dialects of the lower dialect, variants-a (-e) are used:
in English:Have you left? Do you know?
in Turi:esĕ kayrăn-i? esĕ pĕletĕn-i / es pĕletni?
in Anatri:esĕ kayrăn-a? esĕ pĕletĕn-e? es pĕletnĕ?
g) in the upper dialect, individual phrases turn into a complex word by shortening (contraction):
in English: apple tree, frying pan handle, earring, monkey, belt
in Turi:ulmuşşi (olmaşşi), şatmari, hălhanki, upăte, pişĕhe
in Anatri:ulma yıvăşşi / yıvăşĕ,şatma avri, hălha şakki (ear pendant), upa-etem (bear-man), pilĕk şihhi (lower back tie)
Syntactic differences:
a) In the upper dialect (in most dialects), the adverbial participle-sa (-se) performs the function of a simple predicate, which is not allowed in the middle and lower dialects:
in English:I wrote
in Turi:Ep şırsa
in Anatri:Epĕ şırtăm
b) In the upper dialect, analytical constructions are used instead of the lower synthetic one:
in English:Go to lunch, It says in the newspaper
in Turi:Apat şima kilĕr, Kaşiť şinçe şırnă
in Anatri:Apata kilĕr, Xaşatra şırnă
There is also a mixed type.
Other lexical differences:
Another feature between the upper and lower dialects:
in English:We, you
in Turi:Epĕr, Esĕr
in Anatri:Epir, Esir
There are also those grassroots Chuvash (living inKama) with a biting dialect who use the riding version of Epĕr, Esĕr. It has been established that the correct historical form is the pronunciation ofEpĕr, Esĕr, A comparison with the Tatar Turkic languages, which are close to the Chuvash language, determined historical justice.
Ep / Epĕ - I, Epĕ+r - We
Es / Esĕ - You, Esĕ+r - You
Affixes -ĕr/-ăr are converted from singular to plural:
Epĕ şitrĕm - Ep+ĕr şitrĕm+ĕr / I got there - We've reached it
Epĕ şırtăt - Ep+ĕr şırtăm+ăr / I wrote - we wrote
Ham vularăm - Ham+ăr vularăm+ăr / I read it - we read it
There is no "+ir" suffix in the Chuvash language so this is a big mistake. No one says "kiltĕm+ir", vularăm+ir", çitrĕm+ir". Don't say "Hamir turăm+ir". There is a dialect with pronunciation "Ep+ĕr+ĕn" - instead of "Pir+ĕn" (our), and "Es+ĕr+ĕn" - instead of "Sir+ĕn" (your) on this we can assume that their pronunciation was historical, because the structure is more correct, but because of what evolution it transformed into "pirĕn/sirĕn".
Ep+ĕr pĕr+le - We are one
Es+ĕr ik+sĕr - The two of you
There are also very different words.
The dispute over the literary language
The modern Chuvash literary language was formed on the basis of a grassroots dialect, before this period an old literary language based on an upper dialect was in use. There are linguists who believe that the mother tongue was still the riding dialect of the Chuvash, when now it is considered to be the primary grassroots dialect. Their arguments are based on certain factors:
1) the migration of the Chuvash in the post-Horde period was from north to south, and not vice versa, the further they moved away from the root region towards the south and east, the more their language was subject to changes. Russian language was strongly influenced by the Kipchak languages (steppe raids), and after the settlement of Simbirsk by Russian people (at that time a very large city, much larger than Cheboksary), the dialect of the grassroots Chuvash in the area of Buinsk was strongly influenced by the Russian language, which is easily provable, all the most ancient records of the Chuvash language made by different travelers, such as G. F. Miller and others, contain words only of the upper-level dialect and not one of the lower-level. .
3) One of the rules says that the sound -T- standing at the end of a borrowed word in Chuvash falls out, for example:friend - dust - tus, cross - krest - hĕres... The auslaut [t] is not pronounced in oral speech, it disappears in the position after the consonant [s] (the latter in this case is replaced by a soft [ş]):vlast' ~ vlaş, vedomost' - vetămăş, volost' - vulăs, pakost' - pakăş, sançast' - sançaş, oblast' - oblaş. In addition, the affixal [t] is not pronounced orally and in certain verb forms established as a literary language:pulmast' < [pulmaş] ~ It doesn't happen, the correct historical form: "pulmas". As wellkurmast' < [kurmaş] ~ He doesn't see it, the correct historical form: "kurmas". As wellkilmest' < [kilmeş] ~ It doesn't come, the correct historical form: "kilmes". The historically correct affix is "-mas/-mes", instead of "-mast'/-mest' ", which appeared as a result of the influence of the Russian language. As is known, the form with the ending-st' and-st is not peculiar to the Chuvash language by its nature, which means it is a late influence of the Russian language on the dialect of the lower Chuvash. Affixes: -mes/-mas, -mep/-map, -men/-man.
4) In most dialects,/t/ palatalizes only when it is preceded by the front vowels:kileť, pereť, ükeť, kĕteť. If/t/ is preceded by the back vowels, it doesn't palatalize:yurat, kalat, urat, păhat, kayat. In the grassroots dialect, all the end T's soften.
5) A simple shortened address in the literary language has become unacceptable, only respectful treatment has been left with the correct pronunciation: Instead of "Es yuratan" - "Esĕ yuratatăn" - "do you love". "Ep pırap" - "Epĕ pıratăp" - "I'm coming".
6) Instead of the supreme dialect "Kayappăr - we go away, Utappăr - we come, Vulappăr - we read", it is customary to write and speak in a grassroots dialect subject to Russification: " Kayatpăr, Utatpăr, Vulatpăr".
*There is also a mixed type, where all variants of the case are used at once, this is especially noticeable in those settlements that arose at the turn of the 17th-20th centuries, such villages created by combining speakers of upper and lower dialects gave birth to a more universal dialect where both options were used .
The consonants are the following (the corresponding Cyrillic letters are in brackets): Thestops,sibilants andaffricates arevoiceless andfortes but becomelenes (sounding similar tovoiced) in intervocalic position and afterliquids,nasals andsemi-vowels. Аннепе sounds likeannebe, but кушакпа sounds likekuzhakpa. However,geminate consonants do not undergo this lenition. Furthermore, the voiced consonants occurring inRussian are used in modern Russian-language loans. Consonants also becomepalatalized before and afterfront vowels. However, some words like пульчӑклӑ "dirty", present palatalized consonants without preceding or succeeding front vowels, and should be understood that such are actually phonemic:
A possible scheme for the diachronic development of Chuvash vowels[citation needed] (note that not all the sounds with an asterisk are necessarily separatephonemes).
According to Krueger (1961), the Chuvash vowel system is as follows (the preciseIPA symbols are chosen based on his description since he uses a different transcription).
András Róna-Tas (1997)[34] provides a somewhat different description, also with a partly idiosyncratic transcription. The following table is based on his version, with additional information from Petrov (2001). Again, the IPA symbols are not directly taken from the works so they could be inaccurate.
The vowels ӑ and ӗ are described asreduced, thereby differing inquantity from the rest. In unstressed positions, they often resemble aschwa or tend to be dropped altogether in fast speech. At times, especially when stressed, they may be somewhat rounded and sound similar to/o/ and/ø/.
Additionally,ɔ (о) occurs in loanwords from Russian where the syllable is stressed in Russian.
The usual rule given in grammars of Chuvash is that the last full (non-reduced) vowel of the word is stressed; if there are no full vowels, the first vowel is stressed.[35] Reduced vowels that precede or follow a stressed full vowel are extremely short and non-prominent. One scholar, Dobrovolsky, however, hypothesises that there is in fact no stress in disyllabic words in which both vowels are reduced.[36]
Vowel harmony is the principle by which a native Chuvash word generally incorporates either exclusively back or hard vowels (а, ӑ, у, ы) and exclusively front or soft vowels (е, ӗ, ӳ, и). As such, a Chuvash suffix such as -тен means either -тан or -тен, whichever promotes vowel harmony; a notation such as -тпӗр means either -тпӑр, -тпӗр, again with vowel harmony constituting the deciding factor.
Chuvash has two classes of vowels:front andback (see the tableabove). Vowel harmony states that words may not contain both front and back vowels. Therefore, most grammatical suffixes come in front and back forms, e.g. Шупашкарта, "in Cheboksary" but килте, "at home".
Vowel harmony does not apply for some invariant suffixes such as the plural ending -сем and the 3rd person (possessive or verbal) ending -ӗ, which only have a front version.[37] It also does not occur in loanwords and in a few native Chuvash words (such as анне "mother"). In such words suffixes harmonize with the final vowel; thus Аннепе "with the mother".
Compound words are considered separate words with respect to vowel harmony: vowels do not have to harmonize between members of the compound (so forms like сӗтел|пукан "furniture" are permissible).
The consonant т often alternates with ч before ӗ from original *i (ят 'name' - ячӗ 'his name'). There is also an alternation between т (after consonants) and р (after vowels): тетел 'fishing net (nom.)' - dative тетел-те, but пулӑ 'fish (nom.)' - dative пулӑ-ра.[38]
Consonants
In the Chuvash orthography, the fortis and lenis consonants are not differentiated, because their changes are very straightforward. Therefore, only voiceless consonants are written.
English word
Written Chuvash
IPA
Notes
plowing
ака (aka)
[ɑˈk̬ɑ]
I, me
эпӗ (epĕ)
[ˈep̬ʲɘ̆]
Notice the palatalization on /p/.
ancient
авалхи (avalxi)
[ɑʋɑl̴ˈx̬ɨ]
Notice the centralization of /i/ in a back vowels word, and the lack of palatalization on /x/.
only in Russian loanwords. Placed after a consonant, acts as a "silent back vowel"; puts a distinct/j/ sound in front of the followingiotated: Е, Ё, Ю, Я vowels with nopalatalization of the preceding consonant
You can helpexpand this section with text translated fromthe corresponding article in Chuvash.Click [show] for important translation instructions.
Do not translate text that appears unreliable or low-quality. If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article.
Youmust providecopyright attribution in theedit summary accompanying your translation by providing aninterlanguage link to the source of your translation. A model attribution edit summary isContent in this edit is translated from the existing Chuvash Wikipedia article at [[:cv:Т́ъваш ад́изен̀е с̀ыръва в̀ьр̀ен̀м̀ел̀л̀и к̀н̀ег̀е]]; see its history for attribution.
You may also add the template{{Translated|cv|Т́ъваш ад́изен̀е с̀ыръва в̀ьр̀ен̀м̀ел̀л̀и к̀н̀ег̀е}} to thetalk page.
The most ancient writing system, known as theOld Turkic alphabet, disappeared after theVolga Bulgars converted to Islam. Later, theArabic script was adopted. After theMongol invasion, writing degraded. AfterPeter the Great's reforms Chuvash elites disappeared, blacksmiths and some other crafts were prohibited for non-Russian nations, the Chuvash were educated in Russian, while writing in runes recurred with simple folk.[46][47]
As characteristic of all Turkic languages, Chuvash is anagglutinative language and as such, has an abundance ofsuffixes but no native prefixes or prepositions, apart from the partly reduplicativeintensive prefix, such as in:шурӑ -white,шап-шурӑ -snow-white,хура -black,хуп-хура -jet black,такӑр -flat,так-такӑр -absolutely flat,тулли -full,тӑп-тулли -chock full (compare toTurkishbeyaz -white,bem-beyazsnow-white,kara -black,kap-kara -jet black,düz -flat,dümdüz -absolutely flat,dolu -full,dopdolu -chock full). One word can have many suffixes, which can also be used to create new words like creating a verb from a noun or a noun from a verbal root. SeeVocabulary below. It can also indicate the grammatical function of the word.
Chuvash nouns decline in number and case and also take suffixes indicating the person of a possessor. The suffixes are placed in the order possession - number - case.[38] There are sixnoun cases in the Chuvash declension system:
In the suffixes where the first consonant varies between р- and т-, the allomorphs beginning in т- are used after stems ending in the dental sonorants -р, -л and -н. The allomorphs beginning in р- occur under all other circumstances.[48] The dative-accusative allomorph beginning in н- is mostly used after stems ending in vowels, except in -и, -у, and -ӑ/-ӗ, whereas the one consisting only of a vowel is used after stems ending in consonants.[49]
The nominative is used instead of the dative-accusative to express indefinite or general objects, e.g. утӑ типӗт 'to dry hay'.[50] It can also be used instead of the genitive to express a possessor, so that the combination gets a generalised compound-like meaning (лаша пуҫӗ 'a horse head' vs лашан пуҫӗ 'the horse's head'); with both nominative and genitive, however, the possessed noun has a possessive suffix (see below).[51][52]
In the genitive and dative-accusative cases, some nouns ending in -у and -ӳ were changed to -ӑв and -ӗв (ҫыру → ҫырӑвӑн, ҫырӑва, but ҫырура; пӳ → пӗвӗн, пӗве, but пӳре). In nouns ending in -ӑ, the last vowel simply deletes and may cause the last consonant to geminate (пулӑ 'fish' > пуллан). Nouns ending in consonants sometimes also geminate the last letter (ҫын 'man' → ҫыннӑн).[53]
relic ofdistributive, formed by adding -серен: кунсерен "daily, every day", килсерен "per house", килмессерен "every time one comes"
Semblative (as), formed by adding пек to pronouns in genitive or objective case (манпек, "like me", санпек, "like you", унпек, "like him, that way", пирӗнпек, "like us", сирӗнпек, "like you all", хампек, "like myself", хӑвӑнпек, "like yourself", кунпек, "like this"); adding -ла, -ле to nouns (этемле, "humanlike", ленинла, "like Lenin")
Postfix: ха; adding -шкал, -шкел to nouns in the dative (actually a postposition, but the result is spelt as one word: унашкал 'like that').
Possession is expressed by means of constructions based on verbs meaning "to exist" and "not to exist" ("пур" and "ҫук"). For example, to say, "The cat had no shoes":
кушак + -ӑн ура атӑ(и) + -сем ҫук + -чӗ
(кушакӑн ура аттисем ҫукчӗ)
which literally translates as "cat-of foot-cover(of)-plural-his non-existent-was."
Thepossessive suffixes are as follows (ignoring vowel harmony):
Stem-final vowels are deleted when the vowel-initial suffixes (-у, -и, -ӑр) are added to them. The 3rd person allomorph -ӗ is added to stems ending in consonants, whereas -и is used with stems ending in vowels. There is also another postvocalic variant -шӗ, which is used only in designations of family relationships: аппа 'elder sister' > аппа-шӗ.[54] Furthermore, the noun атте 'father' is irregularly declined in possessive forms:[55]
singular
plural
1st person
атте аттем
аттемӗр
2nd person
аҫу
аҫӑр
3rd person
ашшӗ
ашшӗ
When case endings are added to the possessive suffixes, some changes may occur: the vowels comprising the 2nd and 3rd singular possessive suffixes are dropped before the dative-accusative suffix: (ывӑл-у-на 'to your son', ывӑл-ӗ-нe 'to his son' > ывӑлна, ывӑлнe), whereas a -н- is inserted between them and the locative and ablative suffixes: ывӑл-у-н-та 'in/at your son', ывӑл-ӗ-н-чен 'from his son'.[56]
Adjectives do not agree with the nouns they modify, but may receive nominal case endings when standing alone, without a noun.[57] The comparative suffix is -рах/-рех, or -тарах/-терех after stems ending in -р or, optionally, other sonorant consonants.[58] The superlative is formed by encliticising or procliticising the particles чи or чӑн to the adjective in the positive degree.[59] A special past tense form meaning '(subject) was A' is formed by adding the suffix -(ч)чӗ.[60] Another notable feature is the formation of intensive forms via complete or partial reduplication: кӑтра 'curly' - кӑп-кӑтра 'completely curly'.[61]
Both nouns and adjectives, declined or not, may take special 'separating' forms in -и (causing gemination when added to reduced vowel stems and, in nouns, when added to consonant-final stems) and -скер. The meaning of the form in -и is, roughly, 'the one of them that is X', while the form in -скер may be rendered as '(while) being X'.[62] For example, пӳлӗм-р(е)-и-сем 'those of them who are in the room'. The same suffixes may form the equivalent of dependent clauses: ачисем килте-скер-ӗн мӗн хуйхӑрмалли пур унӑн? 'If his children (are) at home, what does he have to be sad about?', йӗркеллӗ ҫынн-и курӑнать 'You (can) seethat he is a decent person', эсӗ килт(e)-и савӑнтарать (lit. 'That you are at home, pleases one').[63]
The personal pronouns exhibit partly suppletive allomorphy between the nominative and oblique stems; case endings are added to the latter:[38]
singular
plural
nominative
oblique
nominative
oblique
1st person
эпӗ
ман-
эпир (эпӗр)
пир-
2nd person
эсӗ
сан-
эсир (эсӗр)
сир-
3rd person
вӑл
ун-
вӗсем
вӗсен
Demonstratives are ку 'this', ҫак 'this' (only for a known object), ҫав 'that' (for a somewhat remote object), леш 'that' (for a remote object), хай 'that' (the above-mentioned). There is a separate reflexive originally consisting of the stem in х- and personal possessive suffixes:
singular
plural
1st person
хам
хамӑр
2nd person
ху
хӑвӑр
3rd person
хӑй
хӑйсем
Interrogatives are кам 'who', мӗн 'what', хӑш(ӗ) 'which'. Negative pronouns are formed by adding the prefix ни- to the interrogatives: никам, ним(ӗн), etc. Indefinite pronouns use the prefix та-: такам etc. Totality is expressed by пур 'all', пӗтӗм 'whole', харпӑр 'every'.
Among the pronominal adverbs that are not productively formed from the demonstratives, notable ones are the interrogatives хӑҫан 'when' and ӑҫта 'where'.
Chuvash verbs exhibit person and can be made negative or impotential; they can also be made potential. Finally, Chuvash verbs exhibit various distinctions of tense, mood and aspect: a verb can be progressive, necessitative, aorist, future, inferential, present, past, conditional, imperative or optative.
The sequence of verbal suffixes is as follows: voice - iterativity - potentiality - negation - tense/gerund/participle - personal suffix.[64]
Thepersonal endings of the verb are mostly as follows (abstracting from vowel harmony):[65]
singular
plural
1st person
-(ӑ)п/-(ӑ)м
-(ӑ)пӑр/-(ӑ)мӑр
2nd person
-(ӑ)н
-(ӑ)р
3rd person
-(ӗ)
-(ӗ)ҫ(ӗ)
The 1st person allomorph containing -п- is found in the present and future tenses, the one containing -м- is found in other forms. The 3rd singular is absent in the future and in the present tenses, but causes palatalisation of the preceding consonant in the latter. The vowel-final allomorph of the 3rd plural -ҫӗ is used in the present.[66] The imperative has somewhat more deviant endings in some of its forms:
singular
plural
1st person
-ам
-ар
2nd person
-∅
-ӑр
3rd person
-тӑр
-ч(ч)ӑр
To these imperative verb forms, one may add particles expressing insistence (-сам) or, conversely, softness (-ччӗ) and politeness (-ах).
The consonant -т of the present tense marker assimilates to the 3rd plural personal ending: -ҫҫӗ. The past tense allomorph -р- is used after vowels, while -т- is used after consonants. The simple past tense is used only for witnesses events, whereas retold events are expressed using the past participle suffix -н(ӑ) (see below). In addition to the iterative past, there is also an aspectual iterative suffix -кала- expressing repetitive action.
There are alsomodal markers,[66] which do not combine with tense markers and hence have sometimes been described as tenses of their own:[69]
The concessive suffix -ин is added after the personal endings, but in the 2nd singular and plural, a -с- suffix is addedbefore them: кур-ӑ-сӑн(-ин) 'alright, see it'.[71] If the particle -ччӗ is added, the meaning becomes optative.[72]
Potentiality is expressed with the suffix -(а)й 'be able to'.
Thenegative is expressed by a suffix inserted before the tense and modal markers. It contains -м- and mostly has the form -м(а)-, but -мас- in the present and -мӑ- in the future.[66] The imperative uses the proclitic particle ан instead (or, optionally, an enclitic мар in the 1st person).
Achange of valency to a passive-reflexive 'voice' may be effected by the addition of the suffixes -ӑл- and -ӑн-, but the process is not productive and the choice of suffix is not predictable. Still, if both occur with the same stem, -ӑл- is passive and -ӑн- is reflexive.[73] A 'reciprocal voice' form is produced by the suffixes -ӑш and -ӑҫ.[74] There are twocausative suffixes - a non-productive -ат/-ар/-ӑт and a productive -(т)тар (the single consonant allomorph occurring after monosyllabic stems).[75]
Voice suffixes
passive-
reflexive
-ӑл-,
-ӑн-
reciprocal
-ӑш,
-ӑҫ
causative
-(т)тар, (-ат/-ар/-ӑт)
There are, furthermore, various periphrastic constructions using the non-finite verb forms, mostly featuring predicative use of the participles (see below).
-са (default: doing, having done, while about to do')[66] (-сар after a negative suffix)
-а 'doing Y' (the verb form is usually reduplicated)
-нӑҫем(-ен) 'the more the subject does Y':
-уҫӑн 'while doing Y'
-сан 'having done Y', 'if the subject does Y'
-нӑранпа 'after/since having done Y'
-массерен 'whenever the subject does Y'
-иччен 'before/until doing Y'
III.Infinitives
The suffixes -ма and -машкӑн form infinitives.
There are many verbalperiphrastic constructions using the non-finite forms, including:
a habitual past using the present participle and expressing periodicity (эпĕ вулакан-ччĕ, lit. 'I was [a] reading [one]');
an alternative pluperfect using the past participle (эпĕ чĕннĕ-ччĕ, lit. 'I [was] one that had called'; negated by using the negatively conjugated participle эпĕ чĕнмен-ччĕ);
a general present equal to the present participle (эпĕ ҫыракан, lit. 'I [am a] writing [one]'; negated with the enclitic мар),
an alternative future expressing certainty and equal to the future participle (эпĕ илес 'I [am] one who will get'; negated with an encliticised ҫук),
a necessitative future using the necessitative participle (ман/эпĕ тарант(ар)малла 'I [am] one who must feed'; negated with мар),
a second desiderative future expressing a wish and using the converb in -сан (эпĕ ҫĕнтерсен-ччĕ, 'I wish I'd win'),
another desiderative form expressing a wish for the future and using the future participle followed by -чĕ (эпĕ пĕлес-чĕ 'I wish/hope I know', negated by мар with an encliticised -ччĕ).[77]
Word order in Chuvash is generallysubject–object–verb. Modifiers (adjectives and genitives) precede their heads in nominal phrases, too. The language uses postpositions,[78] often originating from case-declined nouns, but the governed noun is usually in the nominative, e.g. тӗп ҫи-не 'onto (the surface of) the ground' (even though a governedpronoun tends to be in the genitive).[79] Yes/no-questions are formed with an encliticised interrogative particle -и.[80] The language often uses verb phrases that are formed by combining the adverbial participle in -са and certain common verbs such as пыр 'go', ҫӳре 'be going', кай 'go (away from the speaker)', кил 'go (towards the speaker)', ил 'take', кала 'say', тӑр 'stand', юл 'stay', яр 'let go'; e.g. кӗрсe кай 'go entering > enter', тухса кай 'go exiting > leave'.[81]
The tens are formed in somewhat different ways: from 20 to 50, they exhibit suppletion; 60 and 70 have a suffix -мӑл together with stem changes; while 80 and 90 juxtapose the corresponding single digit and the word 'ten'.
Ordinal numerals are formed with the suffix-mĕš (-мӗш), e.g. pĕrremĕš(пӗррӗмӗш) 'first', ikkĕmĕš(иккӗмӗш) 'second'. There are also alternate ordinal numerals formed with the suffix -ӑм/-ĕм, which are used only for days, nights and years and only for the numbers from three to seven, e.g. wişĕm(виҫӗм) 'third', tăvatăm(тӑватӑм), pilĕm(пилӗм), ultăm(ултӑм), şiçĕm(ҫичӗм), wunăm(вунӑм).[82]
Some notable suffixes are: -ҫӑ for agent nouns, -лӑх for abstract and instrumental nouns, -ӑш, less commonly, for abstract nouns from certain adjectives, -у (after consonants) or -v (after vowels) for action nouns, -ла, -ал, -ар, and -н for denominal verbs.[83] The valency changing suffixes and the gerunds were mentioned in the verbal morphology section above. Diminutives may be formed with multiple suffixes such as -ашка, -(к)ка, -лчӑ, -ак/-ӑк, -ача.[84]
^Also known asChăvash,Chuwash,Chovash,Chavash,Çovaş,Çuvaş orÇuwaş.
^Rachewiltz's classification implies that Chuvash is a separate branch of the wider "Altaic" language grouping, which is itself controversial the general consensus within linguistic circles is that it s asprachbund, rather than a language family.
^Rachewiltz, Igor de.Introduction to Altaic philology: Turkic, Mongolian, Manchu / by Igor de Rachewiltz and Volker Rybatzki; with the collaboration of Hung Chin-fu. p. cm. — (Handbook of Oriental Studies = Handbuch der Orientalistik. Section 8, Central Asia; 20). — Leiden; Boston, 2010. — P. 7.
^Johanson (1998); cf. Johanson (2000, 2007) and the articles pertaining to the subject in Johanson & Csató (ed., 1998).
^Korhonen, Mikko (1986).Finno-Ugrian Language Studies in Finland 1828-1918. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica. p. 80.ISBN951-653-135-0.
^Golden, Peter B. (1992).An introduction to the history of the Turkic peoples: ethnogenesis and state-formation in medieval and early modern Eurasia and the Middle East. Turcologica. Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz. pp. 88 89.ISBN978-3-447-03274-2.
^Sinor, Denis (1997).Studies in medieval inner Asia. Collected studies series. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate. p. 336.ISBN978-0-86078-632-0.
^Savelyev, Alexander (1 January 2020)."Chuvash and the Bulgharic languages".The Oxford Guide to the Transeurasian Languages:446–464.doi:10.1093/oso/9780198804628.003.0028.ISBN978-0-19-880462-8.Early scholarship from the 18th century associated Chuvash with the Uralic languages, being unable to disentangle complicated areal phenomena in the Volga-Kama region (see, e.g., language groupings in Pallas 1787–1789). The Turkic origin of Chuvash was proposed no later than by Klaproth in 1828 and convincingly proved by Schott in 1841. In 1863, Feizkhanov managed to read three grave epitaphs in the Volga Bulghar language based on his knowledge of the contemporary Chuvash. Strong arguments relating Chuvash to Volga Bulghar were summarized by Ašmarin in 1902; since then, the Volga Bulghar → Chuvash linguistic continuity has gained general acceptance in the field. Together with its extinct relatives, Chuvash forms the separate Bulgharic branch of the Turkic family, which exhibits many differences from the so-called Common Turkic languages
^András Róna-Tas."Nutshell Chuvash"(PDF).Erasmus Mundus Intensive Program Turkic languages and cultures in Europe (TLCE). Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 7 August 2011. Retrieved31 August 2010.
^Сатур, Улатимӗр. 2011. Ҫӑлтӑр ҫӳлти тӳпере / Звезда на небе. Шупашкар (a book on Chuvash myths, legends and customs)
General
Agyagási, Klára.Chuvash Historical Phonetics: An Areal Linguistic Study. With an Appendix on the Role of Proto-Mari in the History of Chuvash Vocalism. 1st ed. Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019.https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh4zh9k.
Čaušević, Ekrem (2002)."Tschuwaschisch. in: M. Okuka (ed.)"(PDF).Lexikon der Sprachen des Europäischen Ostens. Enzyklopädie des europäischen Ostens 10. Klagenfurt: Wieser:811–815. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 9 March 2006. Retrieved31 August 2010.
Johanson, Lars (1998)."The history of Turkic".Johanson & Csató. Encyclopædia Britannica Online CD 98. pp. 81–125. Archived fromthe original on 8 April 2011. Retrieved5 September 2007.
Lars Johanson (2000)."Linguistic convergence in the Volga area".Gilbers, Dicky & Nerbonne, John & Jos Schaeken (ed.). Languages in contact Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. pp. 165–178 (Studies in Slavic and General linguistics 28.).
Johanson, Lars (2007). Chuvash.Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford:Elsevier.
Krueger, John (1961).Chuvash Manual. Indiana University Publications.
Paasonen, Heikki (1949).Gebräuche und Volksdichtung der Tschuwassen. edited by E. Karabka and M. Räsänen (Mémoires de la Société Finno-ougrinenne XCIV), Helsinki.
Павлов, И. П. (2017). Современный чувашский язык. Чебоксары.
Петров, Н. П (2001)."Чувашская письменность новая". Краткая чувашская энциклопедия. – Чебоксары. pp. С. 475–476. Archived fromthe original on 11 March 2007. Retrieved11 February 2008.
Róna-Tas, András (2007). "Nutshell Chuvash" (PDF).Erasmus Mundus Intensive Program Turkic languages and cultures in Europe (TLCE). Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 August 2011.
Алос-и-Фонт, Эктор (2015).Преподавание чувашского языка и проблема языкового поведения родителей. Чувашский государственный институт гуманитарных наук.
Krueger, John R. "Remarks on the Chuvash Language: Past, Present and Future". In:Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages: Their Past, Present and Future. Edited by Isabelle T. Kreindler. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1985. pp. 265–274.doi:10.1515/9783110864380-013
Zheltov, Pavel V. (2006). "Comparative Analysis of Some Tatar and Chuvash Affixes".Turcica.38:325–331.doi:10.2143/TURC.38.0.2021278.
.jpg)
