Trajik Başarı: Türk Dil Reformu

by Geoffrey Lewis, Mehmet Fatih Uslu (Translator)

Yirminci yüzyılda Türkçenin yaşadığı köklü değişimde neler kazandık, neler kaybettik? Geoffrey Lewis, Trajik Başarı: Türk Dil Reformu adlı, Oxford Üniversitesi'nde klasikleşmiş olan bu çalışmasında, çok geniş kapsamlı ve tarafsız bir değerlendirme yapıyor. Türkçenin yaşadığı alfabe değişikliğini ve dili yabancı öğelerden arındırma çabalarını bütün aktörleriyle, tarihsel bir süreç içinde ele alıyor.

Oxford Üniversitesi'nde Türkçe eğitimi alanında çalışmış olan Geoffrey Lewis'in bu çalışması ülkemizde büyük ilgi görmüştür. Lewis aynı zamanda Dede Korkut Kitabı'nı İngilizceye çevirmiş ve dil alanındaki çalışmaları nedeniyle birçok ödül almıştır.

"Başarıya trajedi niteliğini katan yalnız Osmanlı Türkçesinin kayboluşu değil - zaten onun zamanı çoktan geçmiştir ... - dilin doğal gelişiminin, 1920 ve 1930'ların Türkçesinin, yani Halide Edip Adıvar, Sabahattin Ali, Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu ve Reşat Nuri Güntekin gibi yazarların dilinin yitirilişidir."
-G. Lewis-

"Büyüleyici bir kitap... sözünü esirgemeyen, sert ve samimi ama baştan sona nükteli."
-Journal of Middle Eastern Studies-

"Lewis konuyla ilgili çok büyük bir araştırma yapmış ve canlı, nükteli bir üslupla yazmış. Türkçe ve dilbilim bölümleri için kesinlikle gerekli bir çalışma."
-Choice-

Genres: Linguistics, History, Nonfiction, Language, Turkish, Politics

271 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1999

About the author

Geoffrey Lewis was an English Turkologist and the first professor of Turkish at the University of Oxford. He is known as the author of Teach Yourself Turkish and academic books about Turkish and Turkey.

Lewis was born in London in 1920 and educated at University College School and St John's College, Oxford (MA 1945, DPhil 1950; James Mew Arabic Scholar, 1947).

At St John's College Lewis initially studied Classics. With the outbreak of the Second World War, he served from 1940 to 1945 as a radar operator in the Royal Air Force. Posted primarily in Libya and Egypt, he taught himself Turkish through local Turkish acquaintances, from the Turkish newspaper Yedi Gün available in Cairo, and from Turkish translations of English classics sent to him by his wife. He returned to Oxford in 1945 with his newly acquired interest in Turkish and on the advice of H. A. R. Gibb took a second BA degree in Arabic and Persian as groundwork for Ottoman Turkish, which he finished with first-class honours (not achieved in this double subject since Anthony Eden in 1922) in just two years. He spent six months in Turkey before pursuing his doctoral work on a medieval Arabic philosophical treatise at St John's College.

Turkish was not taught at Oxford before Lewis was appointed to his academic post in 1950; it was through his efforts that it became established in the Oxford syllabus of Oriental studies by 1964.

Reviews

[Christopher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Geoffrey Lewis' THE TURKISH LANGUAGE REFORM: A Catastrophic Success is a presentation of the wild transformation of Standard Turkish over the course of the 20th century. Ottoman Turkish was an arcane written language understandable only to a tiny elite, filled with Arabic and Persian constructions. The Turkish of today is closer to the speech of the masses, but government fiat succeeded in pushing hundreds of neologisms into the language, some respecting the structure of Turkish and others bizarre inventions out of whole cloth. In any event, the average Turk today cannot understand texts from a century ago, and even works from a few decades ago (after the reform had started) can be unintelligible already. This severing of Turkey from its past is the "catastrophic success" of the subtitle. Lewis' work requires of course some basic knowledge of Turkish, but all quotations are translated and the book is quite accessible to even beginners in the language.

The initiator of language reform was Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. A written language freed of Arabic and Persian elements was for him just one more part of turning the country into a westward-looking secular republic. Ataturk's goals might have been sincere but, as Lewis entertainingly describes, his views on linguistics were amateur and often downright nutty. For example, the dictator supported the notion (the "Sun-Language Theory") that Turkish is the original language of all mankind, and foreign words could be allowed to remain if it could be demonstrated that they were derived from this primal Turkic speech.

After the death of Ataturk, the language reform office that he founded, the Turk Dil Kurumu, continued its work with the generous funding established in his will. Much of the book documents the TDK's work, as well as influential figures such as Atay, Atac and Sayili. The origins of major new word-building elements like -sel (e.g. "dinsel") and -l (as in "okul") are given. Finally, Lewis tells of how the TDK was rendered more or less powerless in a 1983 shakeup, now making simple recommendations for Turkish equivalents of international terminology in computing and the sciences, but the damage is already done.

The back matter consists of an ample bibliography, as well as an index of all Turkish words cited in the book which proves quite handy.

I myself don't work much with Turkish -- my Turkic interests are the languages of Central Asia, but I found Lewis' account very accessible and often quite funny. While this is a respectable academic work, Lewis occasionally makes a wry comment on the absurdity of so much of the reform, which taxes a commentator's ability to be neutral and dispassionate. There are quite a few chuckles here. Anyone with an interest in historical linguistics or language engineering ought to enjoy this book.

[Thomas Escritt · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book about the reform of a language I don't speak turned out to be highly entertaining. That should give a sense of quite how lively and engaging this book is. He suggests that years of overzealous language reforms have left Turks without a vocabulary supple enough to communicate effectively, especially on abstract topics, but then hints that gradations of nuance have latterly begun to re-emerge as new coinages and old words get repurposed in a process that made me think of creolisation. Made me think again about other languages that have undergone nationalistic purification processes, like Hungarian.

[Michael DeBusk · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a remarkable achievement. Deep linguistic insight, well-researched history, and entertaining presentation. Great little nuggets along the way such as why modern Turkish doesn’t have a “q”: Atatürk, unaware of the shape of the capital “Q,” did not like the appearance of an enlarged “q” at the beginning of his name “Kemal” and rejected the letter.

[Justpassingby]

I had no idea! The Turkish Society for the Study of Language, founded in 1932 and heavily influential until 1983, went about its blundering way to create thousands of new Turkish words on a basis that can be called pseudoscientific at best. At one time in 1935 Atatürk promoted the "Sun-language Theory" according to which all languages of the world, including English, were derived from Turkish.

Other governments, including my own, have repeatedly tried to reform aspects of language. In secondary school we were handed "language purification" lists to memorize: frequently used Flemish dialectic expressions and their Standard Dutch equivalents; since the lists were based on multiple dialects I usually had more difficulty understanding the original expressions than their standardized counterparts. However, no exercise in politico-linguistic programming has had such a far-reaching scope and influence as the movement initiated by Mustafa Kemal.

The author appears well-informed at least to a non-Turkish speaking layperson like myself. The book is full of juicy anecdotes, striking examples, biographical notes of the principal actors, and careful analyses of systems and mistakes. There are many long citations in Turkish, sometimes even in two different versions of Turkish, but always immediately followed by a full English translation (there is one justified exception where even I could guess the meaning of the loan words).

The title reflects the author's regret that most Turks nowadays are unable to appreciate any of the rich original literature produced prior to 1930.

[Marissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author has an excellent grasp of Turkish linguistics and the technical aspects of the language reform, but his view of the topic in social context is polemical and overly negative. Often, it is also too much based on the opinions of government intellectuals and 'experts', the very people who have always been rather poorly placed to reflect on the speech, and speech needs, of the people. Readers will be disappointed by the book's top down approach; while he mentions new textbooks written with reformed turkish and neologisms, we do not get the perspectives of the teachers or students who encountered this new language in the classroom. His contention that turkish had lost many verbs is weakened by the fact that some of his examples are still part of a regular conversational vocabulary. Part of this is down to perspective, since the period of stabilization in the language he has noticed since 1983 has continued, but part too is that he is too eager to see the worst in the reform. Ultimately, this book is useful if you want to know the strict Hows of the reform, such as etymologies of new derivations, but it does not contextualize this process sufficiently within a broader historical understanding of the period.

[Filip · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book details the little known but fascinating story about how Atatürk not only reformed his country, but also its language. The author asks us to imagine that a ruler would decree that all English words that came into the language with the Normans had to be replaced by Germanic words, and what the consequences of that would be.
In Turkey in the 20th century, this actually happened. Ottoman was an official language, based on Turkish syntax, but with many Arab and Persian words, which gave the language an incredible wealth and subtlety. Atatürk set up a language council to purge the language of these foreign words, replacing them by neologisms (or French words, which were preferable to words of Arab or Persian stock). Often, he intervened directly to impose the use of a certain word.
There are large chunks of text which are rendered in Turkish, and obviously some word lists can't be avoided. Yet the author manages to keep it all interesting, thanks to his clear style and sympathetic descriptions of the effects of this language reform on the daily life of the Turks. People with a basic smattering of Turkish and a strong interest in languages will enjoy this a lot.

[Pinar G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Turk dil reformunu boyle guzel ve olabildigince az etimolojiye girererk anlatan bir kitap az bulunur. Cok ilginc.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing

[Guven · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall a good to great read. The author unravels the story behind some of the neologisms that were coined during Turkish language reform with diligence. He is a bit harsher on the reform than a Turkish scholar could be and there are times where this is justified yet there are also cases he is just overly convicted and makes it worse than it is.

Here’s one example; author claims Ottoman comprising Turkish, Arabic, Persian words was more nuanced and diversified than reformed Turkish. He goes on to exemplify as below, quoting a paragraph from the book verbatim:

In English, besides change, we have alteration, alternation, mutation, variation, permutation, vicissitudes, deviation, modification, transformation, metamorphosis. Many of these can be paralleled in Ottoman, i.e. early Republican Turkish: istihale, tahavvül, tebeddül, tebeddülât, tagayyür, takallüp and so forth, whereas the modern Turk's choice is pretty much restricted to değişmek 'to change' and başkalaşmak 'to become different’.

Modern Turkish has definitely more than two options in this case; farklılaşma, ayrışma, ayrılma, dönme, dönüşme, dönüşüm, sapma can all be considered depending on the context. Some of these words derive from the same root but so do some of the Arabic words he mentions. On top of that words of latin or greek origin from his list are incorporated into Turkish such as mutasyon, permütasyon, metamorfoz. Suffice it to say the situation is not as drastic as describes.

Going back to the general overview of the book, I mostly appreciated the parts where he shared remarks as a linguist. For example some of the suffixes were abused in the reform process, a suffix which originally forms an adjective from a verb has been used to form an adjective from a noun. He makes several observations like this which would have escaped the attention of someone who is not knowledgeable on the domain like myself.

[Lucas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thorough and encompassing summary of the language issues involved in one of the most interesting language reforms in history. One issue I found was the nostalgic tinge Lewis takes on near the end when he begins to lament to the "better times" and loss of certain features; a perspective I'd consider a bit short-sighted for someone woh studies language change at all. Some basic understanding of Turkish (and Arabic, as well) would be preferable when approaching this book but is entirely unnecessary.

[Kartik · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's not often that you read a book on linguistics that's this witty. It's thoroughly researched to boot, and the author really impresses upon you the gravity of the change that occurred during this reform. Another neat feature is the fact that Lewis chooses to use the native Turkish text at all times, to visually represent the changes in the language. He has a clear cut point to make and goes about doing it systematically. A very entertaining read, and informative at the same time.

[Wallace · Rating 3 out of 5]

Extremely opinionated and catty. Which only makes it more interesting.

[Berna · Rating 2 out of 5]

A well written book. Easy to read.
However I can’t say the same for the arguments. The whole book seems to be created to argue against the Language Reform, including the Letter Reform, without much evidence. Some may say “what about the tons of examples he gives about lost words and meanings”, then I would say we need more than that to prove the Language Reform unsuccessful. The writer *believes* that the purification of the Turkish vocabulary from Arabic and Persian words left the language without the ability to express subtleties in thoughts. Very well, but how do we compare it? No explanation. Even though being a professor of Turkish, however, I thought that the writer might not know everyday spoken Turkish, as some examples they give are simply wrong. Neither the some purged words are gone forever nor the “made-up” words are useless. Most of them exist in the language all together. I think it might be due to his age at the time he wrote the book. Still, though, feels prejudiced. Some instances where he mentioned the population was illiterate ANYWAYS to explain that loss of words was bad, was bad.
The writer expands his arguments ignoring the fact that language is an alive entity. As any human’s merit, we use whatever it is useful and leave whatever it is not. Anyone who reads Turkish poetry after 1940s will see that. How it can create impeccable ideas and emotions with “made up words”.
Now I am going to make a criticism just the way he does, as a native Turkish speaker: I am having hard time to express my thoughts in English, I have to use more than a word; so English is not a rich language.

[Fatih Kara · Rating 2 out of 5]

Öncelikle çok kötü bir çeviri olduğunu belirtmeliyim. M. Fatih Uslu, kitabı öğrenciyken çevirdiğini ve yeni baskıların kendisinden habersiz yapıldığını söyleyerek işin içinden çıkmış. Umarım okulunu bitirdikten sonra Türkçeyi daha iyi öğrenmiştir.

Lewis, büyük bir araştırmayı, yaşlı bir hocanın öğrencileriyle yaptığı dedikodu düzeyine nasıl indirmiş, kutlamak gerek. Önemli bir araştırmacı olduğunun ve özellikle bu tür çalışmaların büyük bir emek istediğinin ayırdındayım. Yine de yazarın desteksiz saptamaları ve "Ben dedim, oldu." yaklaşımı bunaltıcı. Bu kadar önemli konuların laklakla geçiştirilmesi üzücü, ne diyeyim. Umarım aynı araştırma yükünü taşıyabilecek, işini ciddiye alan biri çıkar da doğrusunu daha iyi anlatır.

[Abdullah Şahin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best book I have ever read about the Turkish language reform. THERE İS NO İDEOLOGY. İt's objective and the subhead is suitable. As a Turk and one is against the Turkish language reform, i liked and i suggest. You could see in the Book, people who reformed were not capable, when u read the book you see better. They didn't try or thought of how to get successful they, especially Kemâl Pasha, wanted the Ottoman language and letter to be changed. There is no scientific rules or something else , only metamorphosis.

[Kim Shively · Rating 5 out of 5]

No doubt, this book is for geeks - it's hard to think of a more technical topic. But Lewis's prose (and occasional zingers and homages) make for enjoyable reading, especially for those who are interested in the connections between language and nationalism. I'll admit that I skimmed through the lists of word substitutions and discussions of suffix/prefix/infix rules concocted by the reformers. But the overall narrative is entertaining, and the author knows his linguistics!

[Mateo Jaramillo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great research into the main thesis. I was expecting more information about the grammar of Turkish, but it pretty much exclusively focuses on the vocabulary. However, there is absolutely no justification for its $40 price tag, given that it doesn't even dabble in the technical side of the syntax.

I might re-read at a later date when I learn Turkish and can appreciate more of the nuance.

[Elif Derin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Verdiği örneklerle tüm reform hareketine dahil olmanızı sağlayan, tanzimattan alıp 80lere kadar dilde yaşanan değişiklikleri ayrıntılarıyla anlatan, üslubu, dili ve çevirisi takdire şayan tavsiye edilebilir bir kitap.

[Stella Borthwick · Rating 5 out of 5]

i had been wanting to read this since i first started researching the turkish language reform a year ago and it did not disappoint. atatürk is maybe my favourite historical figure but man was he bad at linguistics.

[Kamryn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was, truthfully, the most engaging academic text I think I’ve ever read. Lewis was snarky enough to keep it interesting, and he provided a great amount of background so even readers who don’t speak Turkish (ie me) can appreciate what he writes about.

[Mert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yazarın Türkçe'ye olan hakimiyeti çok şaşırtıcı. Gayet detaylı bir şekilde ve çok sayıda örnekle Türk dil reformu tarafsız bir şekilde özetlenmiş. Cumhuriyet tarihine, Atatürk'e ve dilbilime ilgi duyan herkesin okuması gereken bir kitap.

[Mkeremyuksel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Yer yer özensiz çeviri.

[Sachin K · Rating 3 out of 5]

A well-researched book with plenty of examples.

[Yunus Yenen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vasat ve art niyetli.