Defense of the dissertation of Mnaidarova Miramgul for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the specialty «8D02305 - Рhilology»

L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, a dissertation defense for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) by Mnaidarova Miramgul on the topic ««Morphological and derivational structures of common anthroponyms of the Kazakh and Turkish languages»» to the educational program «8D02305 – Рhilology».

The dissertation was carried out at the «Kazakh Linguistics education department» of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University.

The language of defense is kazakh

Official reviewers:

Temporary members of the Dissertation Committee:

Scientific advisors:

Gulnar Adibetkyzy Sarseke — Candidate of Philological Sciences, Acting Professor of the Department of Kazakh Linguistics at L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University (Astana, Kazakhstan),

– Ibrahim Sahin — PhD, Professor at the Institute of Turkic World Studies of Ege University (Izmir, Turkey).

The defense will take place on June 24, 2026, at 11:00 AM in the Dissertation Council for the training direction «8D023 – Languages and literature» in the specialty «8D02305 – Рhilology» of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University. The defense meeting is planned to be held online.

Link: https://clck.su/WePju

Address: Астана қ., Қ.Сәтбаев көшесі, 2, оқу-әкімшілік ғимарат, №101 ауд.

Abstract (English): The dissertation by Mnaidarova Miramgul Serguzhaevna on the topic “ Morphological and derivational structures of common anthroponyms of the Kazakh and Turkish languages ” has been prepared for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the educational program 8D02305 – Philology. ABSTRACT Relevance of the Research Topic. Anthroponyms are linguistic units that reflect changes and developments in the spiritual and cultural values of a linguistic community, while also indicating the intellectual and cognitive potential of language speakers. Through personal names, a society’s worldview, social structure, historical memory, and cultural orientations are manifested at the linguistic level. In this context, anthroponyms are regarded not only as nominative units but also as important linguistic markers that reveal the cultural and cognitive code of a particular ethnic group. This research is devoted to identifying the morphological structure and derivational mechanisms of common anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages. The study analyzes the role of root morphemes in anthroponym formation, the word-forming functions of affixes, as well as the semantic changes of compound names formed through analytic processes. The formation and functioning of anthroponyms in society are closely connected with social consciousness, social structure, cultural, and ideological factors, which determine their dynamic development. Accordingly, based on a comparative analysis of Kazakh and Turkish language materials, the dissertation examines the patterns of anthroponymic changes—from basic linguistic units to complex structures. The object of the research is the morpheme and its role in anthroponym formation, as well as the influence of socio-cultural changes on linguistic units. In addition, the study analyzes the role of derivational word families and word-formation patterns in the formation of anthroponyms, the participation of different parts of speech in the creation of personal names, processes of semantic shift, as well as issues related to compound words and compositional semantics. The genetic relationship between Kazakh and other Turkic languages has traditionally been studied within general Turkology and in terms of identifying specific features of individual languages. After Kazakhstan gained independence, issues of linguistic continuity between Kazakh and Turkish, as well as the preservation and development of Proto-Turkic elements in various linguistic forms, became the subject of extensive research. This dissertation, through a comparative analysis of Kazakh and Turkish anthroponyms from morphological and derivational perspectives, aims to provide a comprehensive examination of the interrelation between language and culture, society and thought, in typological and semantic dimensions. Theoretical Significance of the Research. The Kazakh and Turkish languages belong to two major branches of the ancient Turkic languages: Kazakh originates from the Kipchak branch, while Turkish belongs to the Oghuz branch. Although comparative studies of Turkic languages have significantly developed in the post-independence period, their scientific foundations were established much earlier. The earliest systematic information in Turkology is reflected in M. Kashgari’s work “Dīwān Lughāt al-Turk”, which describes common lexical features and naming traditions among Turkic peoples. At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, the works of V. V. Radlov and P. M. Melioransky introduced ancient Turkic written monuments into scientific circulation and laid the foundation for the historical-comparative study of Turkic languages. During this period, the phonetic and morphological systems of Turkic languages were comprehensively characterized for the first time, which later became the methodological basis for onomastic research. In subsequent years, within the historical-comparative approach, scholars such as F. E. Korsh, E. D. Polivanov, N. K. Dmitriev, S. M. Malov, and N. Z. Gadzhieva focused on identifying morphological systems, word-formation structures, and typological features of Turkic languages. In these works, agglutinative structure, the relationship between roots and affixes, and the functions of morphemes were considered within the framework of general Turkic linguistic patterns. In modern linguistics, the study of anthroponyms is multidimensional. They are analyzed in terms of morphological structure, word-formation models, semantic motivation, functional role, and cognitive content. This multilayered nature allows anthroponyms to be considered not only as purely linguistic units but also as objects of ethnolinguistic and anthropocentric research. Studies in this field demonstrate that personal names have developed as an independent category within the language system. Morphological and derivational issues of the Kazakh language have been studied within various scientific approaches. In particular, significant contributions to the study of Kazakh grammar were made by K. Zhubanov, S. Amanzholov, N. Sauranbayev, A. Iskakov, G. Musabayev, while the theoretical foundations of word formation were developed in the works of N. Oralbayeva, Y. Mamanov, T. Zhanuzakov, A. Kaidar, R. Syzdyk, K. Omiралиyev, K. Yessenov, N. Uali, Zh. Mankeeva, and A. Salkynbai. In addition, onomastic, derivational, and cognitive aspects of modern Kazakh anthroponyms have been comprehensively examined in the works of K. Rysbergen, G. Kuldeyeva, E. Kerimbayev, B. Abdualiuly, G. Madieva, S. Imanberdieva, Z. Temirgazina, and A. Aliakbarova. These studies describe anthroponyms in terms of their nominative nature, morphological structure, word-formation patterns, and semantic motivation within modern linguistic processes. The study of the Turkish language, including its morphological and derivational patterns, has been associated with a new stage of development since the first half of the 20th century. The transition to the Latin alphabet in 1928, Atatürk’s language reform, and the establishment of the Turkish Language Association (Türk Dil Kurumu) in 1932 provided new momentum for the scientific study of Turkish. These reforms intensified the development of the word-formation system and created favorable conditions for systematic research in onomastics, including anthroponyms. In the works of Turkish scholars such as R. Arat, T. Banguoğlu, Z. Korkmaz, T. Tekin, A. B. Ercilasun, T. Gülensoy, S. Çağatay, D. Aksan, and N. Demir, the Turkish language has been comprehensively described in terms of historical grammar, morphology, word formation, and anthroponymic systems. These studies have identified synthetic, compositional, and semantic derivational methods of Turkish anthroponyms, as well as analyzed their cultural and historical foundations. The object of the study – the morphological structure and derivational system of anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages. Subject of research – typologically corresponding anthroponyms of the two languages, their morphological organization, derivational models, and word-formation features. Level of Study of the Topic. The formation and development of anthroponyms reflect the worldview of a nation, its historical memory, and its spiritual and cultural essence. Although anthroponyms have been studied in various aspects within Kazakh linguistics, their comprehensive comparative analysis as a morphological and derivational system based on Kazakh and Turkish language material remains insufficiently developed. In particular, the works of T. Zhanuzakov, devoted to the historical stages of personal names and their semantic motivation, laid a theoretical foundation for subsequent studies; however, their comparative-typological aspect has not been fully elaborated. A fundamental role in the formation and development of the scientific paradigm of Kazakh anthroponymy was played by the works of E. Kerimbayev. In the scholar’s research of the 1990s, particularly in the monograph “Kazakh Onomastics in Ethnocultural, Nominative and Functional Aspects” (1995), Kazakh personal names were for the first time comprehensively considered not as isolated linguistic units but as a complex ethnocultural and functional system. A significant contribution to the systematization of the general onomastic space of Turkic languages was made by G. Kuldeyeva in her doctoral dissertation “The Anthroponymic System of the Modern Kazakh Language” (2001). By identifying historical layers of Kazakh anthroponyms (Ancient Turkic, Arabic-Persian, Russian), the researcher carried out a typological classification of their morphological structure and derivational models. Her conclusions regarding models of compound name formation and phonetic transformations serve as a methodological basis for the comparative analysis of similar phenomena in the Kazakh and Turkish languages. A scholar who elevated onomastic research to a new theoretical level is G. B. Madieva. In her doctoral dissertation “The Onomastic Space of Modern Kazakhstan: Structure, Semantics, Precedentness, Lemmatization” (2005), as well as in subsequent fundamental monographs, she thoroughly analyzed the structural-semantic characteristics of names and issues of lemmatization. The interpretation of onomastic units as a “linguistic code” and a “cultural precedent” makes it possible to understand not only the morphological form of anthroponyms but also their cognitive and pragmatic nature. A special place in contemporary Kazakh linguistics is occupied by the work of Bekzhan Abdualiuly “Kazakh Anthroponym Formation: Theoretical and Practical Foundations” (2012), in which the mechanisms of anthroponym formation are considered as an independent word-formation system. By introducing the term “anthroponym formation” (anthroponymzhassam), the scholar demonstrated that the formation of personal names, on the one hand, obeys the general laws of word formation in language, and on the other hand, represents an independent field with its own derivational models. His conclusions regarding the desemantization of name components and morphophonological phenomena serve as a theoretical foundation for the comparative-typological analysis of the derivational system of anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages. Purpose and Objectives of the Research. The aim of this dissertation is to identify the morphological and derivational structure of common anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages. To achieve this aim, the following objectives are set: - to determine the structural and morphological features of anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages; - to conduct a theoretical review of studies on anthroponyms in morphological and derivational aspects; - to establish the lexical-grammatical functions of the root and anthroponym-forming components; - to reveal the features of the concepts of absolute and relative units within the anthroponymic system; - to show the influence of phonological and morphological phenomena on anthroponym formation in Kazakh and Turkish; - to characterize word-formation families and derivational series of anthroponyms; - to determine the semantic classification of anthroponyms and the features of secondary nomination; - to analyze the compositional semantics of complex anthroponyms and the role of analytical methods in their formation. Scientific Novelty of the Research. - For the first time, a comprehensive comparative-typological analysis of the morphological and derivational structure of common anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages is carried out; - Methods of anthroponym formation in the two related languages are compared, and their typological classification is proposed with the identification of common Turkic (prototypical) and nationally specific models, which allows for a scientific substantiation of the unity of the Turkic onomastic space; - The concepts of the anthroponymic concept and cognitive scenario are for the first time adapted to Kazakh and Turkish language material, and the cognitive-triggering function of complex anthroponyms is substantiated; - The notions of absolute and relative units, phonomorphological phenomena, and the system of word-formation families and derivational series of anthroponyms are comprehensively described; - An автор’s dictionary (lexicon) is developed, including 2000 units revealing the structural and semantic features of Kazakh and Turkish anthroponyms: 1000 Kazakh names (500 male and 500 female) and 1000 Turkish names (500 male and 500 female); - Based on case analysis of complex anthroponyms such as “Nursultan”, “Meiramgul”, “Alparslan”, “Miray”, the relationship between common Turkic roots and national-cultural specificity is clarified. Theses Submitted for Defense: - Anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages represent not merely a set of proper names, but an independent and multilayered linguistic system characterized by semantic, nominative, and cognitive levels. The anthroponymic system differs from other lexical systems in its semantic orientation toward the human essence. - Anthroponym formation is based on semantic derivation: personal names are formed from a root base and, through word-formation families, create stable semantic groups. The main direction of semantic derivation in anthroponyms is not oriented toward an object, but toward the social, cultural, and individual essence of a person. - Anthroponyms arise as a result of secondary nomination, and their motivational basis represents a multilayered system in which lexical, pragmatic, social, and cultural-cognitive factors are interconnected. Personal names are directly linked to social expectations, gender roles, and the historical and cultural context. - The meaning of complex anthroponyms is not a simple sum of the meanings of their components; rather, it is an integral structure formed according to the principles of compositional semantics. Complex personal names emerge as a result of semantic, cultural, and cognitive interaction. - A semantic typology of complex anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish languages has been established: they are classified into evaluative, status-based, wishful, protective, and complex compositional types. This typology confirms the systematic nature of the semantic organization of anthroponym formation. - The application of the concepts of the anthroponymic concept and cognitive scenario demonstrates that personal names function as cognitive models that activate certain personal ideals, behavioral patterns, and social roles within society. Anthroponyms form a cultural-cognitive layer of language. - The results of quantitative analysis of anthroponyms indicate a systematic and stable distribution of semantic components, motivational types, and compositional models. This proves that the semantic patterns of anthroponym formation are not random but systemic in nature. -Comparative case analysis of complex anthroponyms (“Nursultan”, “Meiramgul”, “Alparslan”, “Miray”) shows that they are based on a common Turkic anthroponymic foundation while simultaneously demonstrating national and cultural specificity. - A comprehensive analysis of anthroponyms from the perspective of semantic derivation, secondary nomination, and compositional semantics proposes a new model for describing anthroponym formation within the cognitive and sociolinguistic paradigm. Research Methods. The study extensively employed comparative-typological and componential analysis. In addition, quantitative analysis methods and case study analysis were actively used. Publications Produced Within the Dissertation: Articles published in international peer-reviewed journals indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus: 1. Anthroponyms: the lexicosemantic approach to word formation and its social and cultural implications // Lodz Papers in Pragmatics. – 2024. – pp. 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2024-0025 2. Anthroponyms in Kazakh and Turkish Languages: A Historical Review of Their Studies and Structural Features // Treatises and Documents: Journal of Ethnic Studies. – 2025. – No. 94. – pp. 209–223. Articles published in international peer-reviewed journals indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus: Articles published in journals recommended by the Committee for Quality Assurance in the Field of Science and Higher Education of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan: 1. Problems of Studying the Morphological Structure of Anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish Languages // Bulletin of Toraighyrov University. Philological Series. – 2021. – No. 3. https://doi.org/10.48081/GJQL9184 Publications in proceedings of international conferences and symposia: 1. Features of Anthroponyms in the Modern Kazakh Language // Scientific Evolution. – 2020. – No. 7 (7). 2. Topical Issues of Onomastics in the Kazakh and Turkish Languages // CUDES 2021: International Congress on Current Debates in Social Science. – 2021. – p. 438. 3. The Historical Study of Kazakh and Turkish Personal Names // Turkic Studies Research. – Denizli, 2023. – pp. 196–212. 4. The Importance of International Cooperation in Anthroponymic Research (Based on Kazakh and Turkish Languages) // New Opportunities in Education: Integration of Functional Literacy and Artificial Intelligence. – 2026. – pp. 450–454. 5. Anthroponyms in Kazakh and Turkish Languages: Lexico-Semantic Word Formation and Its Cultural Dynamics // Social and Human Sciences: Discourse of Public Values. – 2026.

Dissertation

List of Scientific Works

Consultant's Review

Foreign Consultant's Review

Conclusion of the Research Ethics Committee