Search Results
, Michael C . 2002 . ‘Central Asians in Mongol China: Experiencing the ‘Other’ from Two Perspectives . ’ Medieval History Journal 5 : 267 – 289 . Brose , Michael C . 2005 . ‘Uyghur Technologists of Writing and Literacy in Mongol China . ’ TP 91
References Abdurusul , Muzappar . 2014 . Weiwueryu de jingcihua duanyu [Deverbalized phrases in Uyghur]. Beijing : Minzu Press . Aihemaiti , Kayisa’er. 2013 . Xiandai weiwu’eryu qingzhuang leixing yanjiu [Situation types in Modern
(riental) M(anuscripts), RAS and The Toyo Bunko (eds.) 2021. Catalogue of the Old Uyghur manuscripts and blockprints in the Serindia Collection of the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts, RAS . Vol . 1 . Tokyo : The Toyo Bunko . Kasai Yukiyo (in
2020 . Berlin Turfan Koleksiyonundaki Bir Yüzü Türkçe Diğer Yüzü Çince Olan Uygur Harfli Yazmalar: Giriş, Metinler, Tıpkıbasımlar [Manuscripts with Uyghur Script in the Berlin Turfan Collection, in Turkish on One Side and Chinese
Sciences & The Toyo Bunko (eds.) 2021 . Catalogue of the Old Uyghur manuscripts and blockprints in the Serindia collection of the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts, RAS . Vol. 1
–Syntax)]. [2nd, revised ed.] Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları. Kaya, Ceval 1994. Uygurca Altun Yaruk (Giriş, Metin, Dizin) [The Old Uyghur Altun Yaruk
ABSTRACT
This paper identifies three manuscript fragments from Turfan as an Old Uyghur version of the story of Shunzi 舜子, a medieval Chinese narrative about Emperor Shun acting as a filial son. In China, the story was part of the lore of filial sons (xiaozi 孝子), popular throughout most of the dynastic period. Early versions of the Chinese story survive in Japan and Dunhuang, and these display obvious parallels with the Uyghur text. While this allows a positive identification of the content of the three Turfan fragments, the differences reveal that none of the known Chinese versions could have served as the source text for the translation. The Old Uyghur version, therefore, represents an otherwise unattested version of the story, which may have developed among the Uyghurs.
, Abdurishid ( 2010 ): Prajñāpāramitā Literature in Old Uyghur . Turnhout, Brepols (Berliner Turfantexte XXVIII). Zhang Tieshan ( 2017
der uighurischen Maitrisimit nom bitig . In: Mirsultan , Aysima – Aydın , Mihriban Tursun – Aydın , Erhan (eds): Eski Türkçeden Çağdaş Uygurcaya. Mirsultan Osman’ın Doğumunun 85. Yılına Armağan–From Old Turkic to Modern Uyghur. Festschrift in
One of the significant problems with Old Turkic inscriptions is that it is not known by which peoples’ or tribe’s Turkic language the inscriptions were written in. Although among the clans and persons who wrote and erected the large inscriptions of the Turkic and Uyghur Khanates, those of Köl Tegin, Bilge Kaghan, Şine Usu, Tariat, Tes and Karabalghasun I were identified, the peoples or clans having erected the other inscriptions are mostly unknown. The most serious problem encountered by researchers in consideration of the tribal seals present in the inscriptions is the uncertainty whether the seal belonged to the tribe that wrote or erected the inscription, or the tribe that was in power at that time.
This paper investigates the inscriptions of the Uyghur Khanate. Our scrutiny is based on the examination of the peculiarities of the Uyghur Khanate inscriptions which cannot be observed in any other inscriptions of Mongolia, Yenisei, Altai and Kyrgyzstan. By substituting these peculiar words with other words to be found in other inscriptions, an attempt has been made to prove that these words are Uyghur dialectal words. After an inquiry whether the words were used subsequent to the runic period, etymological suggestions concerning the words have also been put forward.
