Уточнение степени близости кыпчакских языков между собой в сравнении с финно-угорскими на основе анализа словарей XVIII в.

Introduction. Currently, researchers have no consensus on the classification of Kipchak languages. The dictionaries compiled by P. S. Pallas provide valuable insights into 18th-century Tatar, Bashkir, Nogai, and Kazakh Goals. This article attempts an analysis latter’s graphic features in order to enhance our understanding development dialect-classifying graphophonic isoglosses. Materials methods. paper examines sixteen isoglosses identified A. V. Dybo based materials from modern shows how numbers common for these languages differed 18th century. been uploaded online LingvoDoc platform, all words now parallels with literary languages, Turkic proto-forms according EDAL. are also linked together etymological connections. Results. that century were approximately equidistant each other, some specific closeness observed just between Tatar though Bashkir-Kazakh differ one innovation only, proximity Nogai observed. It can be assumed 20th-century communication resulted a secondary convergence their distancing speakers turn having become closer other. is interesting note Bashkir other archaic reflexes represented, particular, *s (Bashkir), *č (Nogai, Bashkir), *ƛ (š Nogai), changes occurred later. Conclusions. Thus, vocabularies created casts doubt traditional N. Baskakov, Samoylovich, K. Musaev, Savelyev At same time, it should noted O. Mudrak turned glottochronology applied morphological linguostatistics concluded as which not confirmed data graphics texts.