The article deals with the problem of social differentiation of language, which arises from the connection of social linguistics with «language and society», the cause and essence of differentiation, its study, and its problems. Further, the existence of the Kazakh language as a national code, the peculiarities of differentiation, serving in different classes and groups of its speakers, its current differences from previous stages of development are analyzed and considered through the works of the founders of Kazakh linguists A. Baitursynov and K. Zhubanov, the researcher of the modern socio-linguistic situation of the Kazakh language B. Khasanuly. With the help of social institutions formed in Kazakh society in the past centuries, relations between people are brought to a certain order and standards, their behaviour and actions are regulated, cultural and political changes in the society of Tsarist Russia and the Soviet era have separated the people who speak the same language. The natural state of the Kazakh language is disrupted, unity and uniformity, and the weakening of the unifying function of society is described. The author concludes that one of the most urgent tasks of Kazakhstan's social linguistics is to study the factors influencing language differentiation and codeswitching, consider the nature of their influence on language processes and relationships, and identify the social conditionality of the functioning of the Kazakh language as a modern language.
Sociolinguistics, which is one of the new directions of Kazakh linguistics, now focuses on the specifics of the language (languages) in the national community, the study of topical issues in Kazakhstan, where the language situation is multiethnic and multilingual. One of these social linguistic problems is the problem of social differentiation of language and its close relation to code-switching.
Social classification and differentiation of language in society are processes that can occur both naturally (unconsciously) and in a regulated (consciously) way. Naturally, if we look at the developed national languages of today, we can see that several forms are clearly distinguished from each other. Their most popular types are the literary language of the national language, spoken language, dialect, coinet, etc. They are further subdivided into subsystems. It can be said, for example, that literary language is divided into several styles.
The individual languages and its forms that make up the social and communicative system of a society serve different purposes in human relations. By mastering a set of these means of communication common to the contingent of speakers in a particular language environment community members use them as needed, depending on the context. For example, if we consider the styles that make up the subsystems of the literary language, the style of fiction words and sentences are used in a variable meaning, image, and in the scientific style the spoken word consists of words and sentences in the literal sense, containing concepts, definitions, terms inherent in the scientific thinking system of a person. If one uses the features of the official business style in office work, court proceedings, and administrative correspondence, a mass nature as a type of foreword is used in broadcasting, appeals, propaganda, press, TV and radio, and others. Thus, modern person, depending on the channel of communication, moves from one language medium to another, from another to the third one.
In the same way, people have to speak the same national languages in different ways, depending on the different situations they face in everyday life and the different social roles they have to perform. The vast majority of such interactions occur naturally. The choice of the national language in the above-mentioned forms sometimes depends on the upbringing, education, profession, gender, and other factors. of the language user, which may also be negligible. For example, if a language user sometimes speaks on an equal
Corresponding author’s e-mail: email@example.com footing with the interlocutor, they may sometimes feel superior, sometimes dependent. In general, people have different social roles in society while interacting with each other: at home, a parent with a child, husband and wife, boss and employee worker, salesman with a buyer in the store, a doctor with patient in the clinic, teacher with schoolchildren, university teacher with student, etc., they speak differently.
These types of social roles are characterized by speech and spelling skills. For example, a child does not talk to their parent like their peers. Also, the words of a student and a teacher, a doctor and a patient, a boss and a subordinate are not the same as the conversations of acquaintances or strangers on public transport [1; 10–11].
Besides, in the conditions of such language communication, the national mentality and traditions of folk speech are preserved. For example, the Kazakh people, the Turkic people in general, use the polite form of «you» (you-siz kaz.) for an older person, and in Sweden, as well as in many European countries, it is customary to say «you» (you-sen kaz.) for an older person. In Kazakh, speaking «you» (you-siz kaz.) is an established language norm of respect for an older person in accordance with national upbringing and discipline, while in Swedish, on the contrary, speaking «you» (you-sen kaz.) to an older person seems to diminish their strength and validity after their age.
S.G. Ter-Minasova notes that the formation of a representative of a language as an individual is influenced not only by the lexical system of the language, but also by all means of language, and gives information about the use of this pronoun in different languages as a grammatical effect. For example, usage of Russian version of pronoun “you” (siz kaz.) in speech means both politeness and plural, in English version the word can not be changed because there is no choice. They use only one version of «you» instead of «siz» and «sen». In this language, this token is widely used when the teacher speaks to the student, the student to the teacher, the general to the soldier, the soldier to the general, everyone speaks to each other. They see it as a democracy that can be seen through speech [2; 188–189]. The peculiarity of such use of language is called by the scientists of sociolinguistics «social classification of language» and «social differentiation of language».
The concept of «social classification of language» originates from the theory of «social stratification» in sociology. «Strata» is a geological term used to describe the layers of the earth's structure, while in sociology it is used to describe the structure and social strata of society. In sociolinguistics, it refers to the linguistic features of the use of groups and strata in society .
The manifestation of the social structure of society in the language is called the social differentiation of language. For example, in society every speaker is classified as a person according to age, place of birth, upbringing, education, social and professional characteristics, gender, etc. The language is selected, used and differentiated accordingly. The social differentiation of language is the process of the emergence of linguistic diversity as a result of different social or territorial conditions. As mentioned above, it is observed, first, in the vocabulary and then, in the whole structure of the language.
Differentiated existence of language is reflected in the development of special functional- communicative systems that serve different social groups in society. This leads to the emergence and development of territorial and social dialects, the emergence of many forms of language, such as literary language and colloquial language, Coine, Pidgin, Creole, slang and argot. All these forms vary depending on the stages of the historical development of human society and the socio-historical conditions of existence of a particular language. They differ in the scope of their activities in society, internal structural development, universality.
The study of the problem of social differentiation of language has a long tradition in linguistics world. It is often said to have begun with I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay's thesis on the division of language into purely social differentiation «horizontally» and «socially». In the third quarter of the twentieth century a well- known representative of the French school of sociology A. Maye, the famous Swiss linguist F. de Saussure's students such as A. Sesche and S. Ball and J. Vandries (Belgium), V. Matzius and B. Gavranek (Czechoslovakia), E. Sapir (USA), J. Fers (England) and others paid attention to this issue. Such Russian linguists as E.D. Polivanova, A.M. Selishcheva, R.O. Shor, L.P. Yakubinsky, B.A. Larina, V.M. Zhirmunsky, M.N. Peterson, V.V. Vinogradov, G.O. Vinokur, M.M. Bakhtin and others made a significant contribution. As a result, many works were written on materials of different languages (English, French, German, Russian, etc.) [4; 92].
What is the level of consideration of this issue in Kazakh linguistics? Can the social differentiation of the modern Kazakh language be considered sufficiently studied? What studies are available on the literary language of the Kazakh language, spoken language, dialect features, urban language, jargon and argos, slang, the language of men and women, the functioning of the Kazakh language as a modern internet language, the language of social networks, types of professional language, the commonality of different interests of the Kazakh language in modern conditions, the language features of groups of people united by hobbies?
Until recently, it seems that this range of questions was studied mainly in the aspect of using language tools. And has the use of the Kazakh language in everyday life been studied depending on the age of speakers, their level of education, area of residence, profession and other characteristics? Such studies provide only a general understanding of the social state of the use of literary language tools. The Kazakh language is not only a literary language, but it is also found in specific groups of native speakers: in the family, in the school class, friends, peers. It does not answer the question of how it is used in companies. Since each such collective is a kind of social group of society, the patterns of language use and language communication in them are diverse and unique in their way. As we have already said, the way a person speaks as a family member is different from the way he speaks as a partner.
Theoretically, when studying verbal communication in small groups, the concept of a social role is very important, since changing roles determine changes in word formation. At the same time, it is important to study the problems of functional style in connection with the theory of social role.
It should be noted that the activity of the Kazakh language in its territory of existence, different strata and groups of its natural consumers is connected not only with internal linguistic patterns, but also with external factors of various nature. One of the most urgent tasks of Kazakhstan's social linguistics is to study these factors, consider the nature of their impact on language processes and relationships, and identify the social conditionality of the functioning of the Kazakh language as a modern language and its current differences from previous stages of development.
Of course, it is wrong to say that nothing is being done in this direction. The first opinions on these social linguistic features in Kazakh linguistics can be found in the works of the “Alash intelligentsia” headed by the founder of Kazakh linguistics of the XX century A. Baitursynuly. Then these issues were discussed in the Soviet era, from K. Zhubanuly to B. Khasanuly, M.M. Kopylenko, A.E. Karlinsky, M.K. Isaev, E.D. Suleimenova, Z.K. Akhmetzhanova, S.T. Saina, N.Zh. Shaimerdenova, S. Bayandina and others. Along with the senior scientists there are A.M. Kumarova, A.M. Abasilov, G.S. Suyunova, K.M. Baibosynova, S.A. Asanbaeva, D.Zh. Kasymova, G.D. Aldabergenova, G.M. Alimzhanova, and others. These problems were considered in the works of scientists, thus, the development of sociolinguistics in Kazakhstan began to gain momentum. However, in this article we would like to focus on the unresolved issues, rather than the results of the sociolinguistic study of the Kazakh language. We will consider it by analyzing the works of linguists A. Baitursynuly and K. Zhubanov, the founders of Kazakh linguistics of the last century and B. Khasanuly, a researcher of the current socio-linguistic situation of the Kazakh language. In our opinion, they are representatives and researchers of three stages that reflect the socio-linguistic situation of the development of the Kazakh language.
The issue of language differentiation, as mentioned above, has been considered in Kazakh linguistics since the beginning of the last century, as well as in world linguistics, its specific causes and internal and external factors have been identified and studied. From the point of view of the issue based on the material of the Kazakh language, it can be seen that in the works of A. Baitursynuly it was considered earlier than the above-mentioned scientists. More precisely, it is described in the article of A. Baitursynuly «To Kazakh writers» published in Issue 4 of Shora journal in 1913. In the same work, the founder of Kazakh linguistics A. Baitursynuly called the «differentiation of language» in use today as «the change of language». «These days, the root of people's tongues disappears like a towering meadow. No matter how hard we try, we can't see it. No one knows for sure where a language came from or how it came to be. Language has a long life. Its journey is thousands of years, not years or hundreds. During such a long life, a language has changed due to various reasons: either degraded or changed, as the country grows, the language becomes more branched», the differentiation of language is connected with the development of society and the country [5, 395]. Further, the linguist explains the example of language management from the history of the development of Turkic languages: «Our Turkic language was one language, and then when the country branched out and grew, the language was also branched out. Although the roots are the same, the Turkic language is divided into different parts. Therefore, the more chapters there are today, the more different the language of the chapter is. The reason for changing the language was the corrupt interaction with various strangers. Turkish children grew up, they were interacting with different people, foreign words and sounds were introduced into the Turkish language, and the gap between the languages gradually increased...» [5; 395]. Further, the teacher of the nation A. Baitursynuly points out the following as the main reasons for the differentiation of language: 1) the interaction of people; 2) mixing of languages, i.e., penetration of words and foreign sounds of another language into one language; 3) the effect of another language’s writing.
Because of the above factors, which allowed the differentiation of the language, did not exist in the Kazakh language at that time, the Kazakh language has preserved its nature, its purity and remained a noble language. «The reason is that the Kazakhs are still working. The Kazakhs who live alone in isolation, without interfering with other people. Kazakh person is a Turkish child who does not want to break the language of others due to the tendency to write in a foreign language. If a few foreign words come from outside, the Kazakhs process them and restorein their language. There is no way to say that the language has changed if the language of foreigners has not influenced it, if the profession and customs have not changed. If it is impossible to say that the Kazakh language is changed, it is impossible to say that the spelling is crooked; there is no spelling in Kazakh that contradicts the nature of the language from the Volga to the Irtysh, from the Ural to Afghanistan, the Kazakhs have the same language and the same spelling. The spelling of a shepherd, a camel, a dancer does not exist in Kazakh. The spelling of the ninety years old man and the nine years child is the same...» [5; 395].
This is the state of the Kazakh language at the beginning of the last century. The conclusion follows from this: economic institutions that manage and organize the economy, political institutions that carry out the functions of governing and managing society, institutions of the spiritual sphere that contribute to the development of science and education, art and support of moral values in society, and the family institute, which is the main and most important branch of the social system, have formed stable forms of coexistence of Kazakh society.
With the help of these social institutions, human relations are brought to a certain level and order, and their behaviour and actions are regulated. As a result, the life of the whole society is properly organized and its stability is ensured. The Kazakh language, like other languages, did not divide but served to unite the Kazakh people, the society, and build a homogeneous culture.
Professor K. Zhubanuly, the founder of Kazakh professional linguistics, speaks about the unity and uniformity of the Kazakh language, the importance of the unifying function of society: «... If we take the language, which is the main mirror of the internal relations of the joint society, the Kazakh language is different from other languages. It can be exposed very rarely. There is almost no dialect in the Kazakh language. Only on this day, we feel that there is a slight glow. However, there is no such language unit in any of the surrounding languages. It is not surprising that 4–5 million people were able to create such a linguistic unity, occupying the vast steppes of the Kazakh land. The internal differences of languages, which are 5–6 times smaller and 20 times smaller, are so strong that the inclusion of some dialects in that language remains controversial.Such integrity in the language, a single language, indicates that there was a long-lasting close relationship in everyday life. If it was not for such close relations, the language of one people, consisting of many different countries, would not be so united. It is clear that this close relationship existed before we joined to Russia. After the joining Russia, we see that relations again weaken, the unity of the Kazakh people disintegrates, the organisms of society are crushed, and accordingly, the seams of the former whole Kazakh culture are broken, crushed and scattered» [6; 439]. As we can see from this, the professor calls «language differentiation» in our modern language as «language fragmentation».
He took a different position in creating a writing system that allows us to differentiate the language and mass media, and in establishing the principles of obtaining words from another language. They were always with the masses of the people and directed the publishing work to be accessible to all literate Kazakhs and through them to illiterate people. To rise the interest in knowledge and correctly understand the reality of being, he developed a plan to take everything to energize it with consciousness. In this regard, it was decided to transfer concepts and ideas that were not previously available to the people in their native language by dressing them in Kazakh words and phrases.
In this regard, they have established clear principles for creating a unified terminology for our academic language. It was approved and adopted at the first congress of Kazakh scientists in Orenburg, June, 1924. Once this applies to the topic we are considering, let's give an example so that our speech to be proved: «For terms, it is preferable to take Kazakh words with a completely appropriate meaning before the other. This is to avoid stratification of language, i.e. in order not to get language upper and lower classes, or rather, language literacy and language the illiterate. For us, Kazakhs, this is very important: the percentage of literate people is insignificant, we do not yet have organized public readings and lectures for the population, both listeners and readers are completely random. To read newspapers, magazines, brochures, and other works of the press, wherever and by whom they are produced, can be useful, the language should be understandable to the general public. Only, in this situation, a small percentage of literate people serve a significant number of illiterate people» [7; 422–423]. This is a manifestation of a conscious effort to prevent the differentiation of language, that is, to prevent the emergence of the language of the upper and lower, or the language of the literate and illiterate.
This tradition dates back to the time of A. Baitursynuly, or rather to the second half of the 30s, as evidenced by his words: «Until the 20th century, the Turkic language was brought to the Kazakh people in a noble way, honour and gratitude in terms of language. If we take away the property that our ancestors gave us, it would not be a good deed” [5; 399].
In the conscious planning and development of the Kazakh language, which at that time was still in its infancy, Alash dignitaries addressed the main socio-linguistic issues. At first, they conducted a phonetic and grammatical study of the nature of the Kazakh language, reformed the alphabet following phonetic requirements, and compiled a grammar. Owing to this, in a short period, the Kazakh language began to adopt a certain form of processing, which allowed it to be self-consciously controlled.
Cultural and political changes in society are closely related to the transition of this language to another form of life or the influence of another language among people who speak the same language. The influence of culture on this is especially significant.
«Modern culture», says A. Baitursynuly, “is not the formation of one nation or race, but the sum of the aspirations and skills of all mankind. In culture, in addition to their creations of each nation, there are intrusions, and the mixing of their cultures is influenced by friendly and hostile attitudes. Access occurs both in the conquest of one nation by another and in the peaceful communication with one another. In this case, religion, customs, morals, social organization, inclinations, instincts, psychology, etc., similar forms facilitate the process of entry and mixing of cultures” [7; 419–420].
It is noted here that we understand culture only in a positive sense, only paying attention to its positive impact and not to its consequences. Professor K. Zhubanuly continued this opinion: «We do not have a person who has studied how much damage was caused by the rule of the Kazakh Tsarist government. The person who is talking about it is just looking at what has benefited or not», he said. This is a topical issue that still needs special consideration.
K. Zhubanuly's article «Revolution and Kazakh nation language», published on November 20, 1935, in Issue No. 31 (61) of the newspaper «Kazakh literature», states that as a result of the conditions that united the Kazakh people and kept them intact for almost 500 years, the unification and self-prosperity of the Kazakh culture, including the Kazakh language, arose. In short, it was:
- The combination of the main interests of each individual and the interests of society in the joint protection of livestock from the enemy on the sidelines, engaged in single animal husbandry, hence the strong civic consciousness and political activism that can reflect the general sorrow of society.
- The commonality of nomadic animal husbandry and land allows people to communicate with each other without being tied to one place.
- The conflict between one and the other tribes in the settlement, the continuous enmity, the continuous re-interjection as a result of each enmity, the strengthening of relations based on this [6; 440]. All the abovementioned economic, political institutes, institutions of the spiritual sphere and the institute of the family in the Kazakh society were performing their functions. It served as a powerful tool in the activities of institutions, that is, in persuading the majority to lead, to war, to peace, to settlement.
In the same article, K. Zhubanovich said: «Since joining Russia, this situation has disappeared, both the task of protecting the foreign enemy and the task of persuading the internal majority have passed into the hands of the government. The Kazakhs, who had previously been a society for grazing livestock, protecting livestock and heads, were now only herdsmen. They had nothing left to think about but their cattle and heads. Thus, civic consciousness has decreased. From the social body, they had an only small part as a village ruler or a sergeant major (volost). Therefore, for the last 40–50 years, the occupation and interests of the Kazakhs ruling class have been both rural ruler or a sergeant major (volost). The new type of land use created a serfdom-like attitude in the village, which demoralized the people even worse» [6; 441].
As a result, the Kazakh lands and roads were cut off, each tribe, each village settled down, lost contacts, made a living in different conditions, and began to lose the unity of culture and language. K. Zhubanuly says: «Some of the so-called dialects of the Kazakh language were born in this era as a result of this disintegration». This was a manifestation of the territorial differentiation of the Kazakh language.
By the end of the 1930s, interest in social linguistic problems in Soviet linguistics (in fact, Russian linguistics) was slowing down. And the renewed interest that emerged in the late 50s and early 60s was characterized by a different channel, social linguistic research of a different orientation. The main emphasis was placed on the processes of bilingualism and multilingualism, which are characteristic of such a multinational state as the USSR. In this regard, the study of macrosociolinguistic problems, i.e. large social communities, in which one or more languages function, were a priority, and the study of language and communication processes in «micro-communities» (families, economic and production groups, etc.) was not carried out.
Within the framework of large-scale research (macrosociolinguistic problems), the Russian language as the language of the Soviet people, as a mean of interethnic communication, was most widely promoted and intensively studied. While the languages of the remaining union republics, including the Kazakh language, are considered structurally, many issues of social activity and existence in the social environment, particularly, related to the natural changes in language tools. Due to a whole set of linguistic, psychological, social, national factors the language remains relevant and insufficiently studied.
The founder of Kazakh social linguistics, professor B. Khasanuly writes: «the language of the peoples of the former Soviet Union developed based on the principles of Leninist language policy, until the second half of 1930s thirties, these principles were largely preserved, and the national language process was on the way to development. The last fifty years have not been fruitless but social needs have not been compensated in their degree. To be clear, from the second half of the 1950s to March 1987, the sphere of public activity of national languages in the Republic began to narrow, their authority began to decline, and raising the question of the development of languages other than Russian threatened to wear the veil of nationalism» [8, 17]. In this work, the scientist calls the main conditions that caused the suppression of the social activity of the Kazakh language:
- The situation of artificially organized multinationals.
- Kazakhs remain in the minority on their land.
- Lack of state care of the Kazakh language.
- Popularization of the theory of unification, integration of nations.
Thus, such a variety of distortions and stagnation in the language life began to bear fruit in the decline of social activity of the Kazakh language, the second language, the abandoned language of its speakers. Therefore, Kazakh society was divided into Kazakh-speaking and Russian-speaking.
This situation is often observed in a bilingual society, where two or more languages are used. Bilinguals are people who speak two or more languages, usually regulate the choice of language(s) consciously in the vast majority, depending on the types and circumstances of language communication. For example, today's an ordinary Kazakh speaks in Kazakh language everyday life, in the family, among close people, neighbours, friends with some local specificity, partly an oral literary form, sometimes mixed language units derived from the Kazakh-Russian bilingualism. In official situations, at work, in educational institutions, at meetings with colleagues, representatives of the authorities, mainly the Kazakh language, sometimes with a mixture of Russian is used. It is important to note that this situation is caused by the fact that one language has its subsystems, including the process of using language units of another individual language or replacing the language as a whole is also visible. The latter, that is, the conscious regulation, of the transition from one individual language to another is often added, a phenomenon characteristic of the multi-ethnic and immigrant language environment. This phenomenon is called «code-switching» in social linguistics.
What is the code? In linguistics, a code is the name of all the tools that perform a communicative function. It includes everything from natural sound languages to artificial languages: Esperanto, Ido, Volyapyuk, as well as modern machine languages, the Morse code, and more. Then Kazakh, Russian, English are called separate language codes, their subsystems are literary language, territorial dialect, sociolect, spoken language, etc. called a subcode.
Code-switching is the process, by which a speaker changes from one code to another or several subcodes in a conversation process. How the code is changed in the speech process depends on several social and linguistic factors.
When two or more people communicate with each other, the communication system they use we can call code. This is why, people usually choose a specific code in verbal communication, and at the same time they move from one code to another, or use codes interchangeably. According to Holmes, the language forms chosen by the speaker will depend on the social situation in which they are speaking. It is important that he talks about what (the subject), to whom, where, and with what thoughts he communicates verbally (the function of interaction). As a result, one message can reach different people in different ways [9; 23].
G.A. Omarbekova in the textbook «Language and Globalization» says that mutual understanding occurs through the use of bilingual or multilingual parties in the communication act by switching from one language to another and using elements of another language (words, phrases, units). In such a bilingual relationship, one of the two languages dominates.The language from which the word is derived (sub-language-embedded, language), and the main language is called a matrix language. She gives the following examples related to code-switching:
- If you have an exam next week, дайындықтарың əлсіз. (English + Kazakh)
- Əріптестер, round table talk 2-ші қабатта болады. (Kazakh +English)
- Я еще не сделал homework, brother? (Russian + English)
- Ребята, үй жұмысын когда закончите? (Russian + Kazakh)
The author says that there are several reasons for the speaker to change the code. For example, a change in the addressee (i.e., the listener), the fact that the addressee or a third interlocutor can speak only one language may cause the code to change. A change in the role of the speaker is also a factor in the exchange of code. For example, a student can use their native dialect while talking to family or meeting with classmates, and they will have to switch the forms of speech formed at the university. If such an exchange does not take place, the addressee may be misunderstood by others, so he can not achieve his goal, in other words, suffers from communicative failure [9, 22–23].
In a multilingual society there can be several reasons to change the code. It often forces people to switch to a second code whilst choosing words and phrases that are understandable to a particular topic, especially when filling in a lexical gap. For example, today's Kazakh-speaking Kazakhs are forced to switch to Russian in naming nouns in the same room (workplace). After all, except for the door and window in the attic — the floor (rarely called the floor), curtains, cornices, chandeliers, blinds, batteries, window sills, sockets, switches, etc. Passwords in the pronunciation and spelling of the Russian language. This is a phenomenon of hybridization, which is reflected in the language of modern integration. The Kazakh language has been influenced by this phenomenon since Soviet times. There are several reasons for this:
- Discovery of science and technology in other countries. In our case, most of them enter through the Russian language.
- The existence of socio-political changes in countries whose languages have reached the level of donors, and the inclusion of socio-political news in the model of those countries. In our case, it is also related to the Russian language. This is evidenced by the fact that even during the 30 years of Kazakhstan's independence, all laws were drafted in Russian and translated into Kazakh, except for a few in the Kazakh language, and the main legal force is the Russian version.
- Existence of economic advantages of those countries.
Along with hybridization, the proliferation of hybrid words has become a disturbing phenomenon. The basis of hybrid words is keywords, which in modern linguistics is the integration of foreign vocabulary into the native language system.
At present, not only Russian, but also English words are constantly entering into the Kazakh language. For example, in politics: boomer, rating, lobbying, ombudsman, speaker, image, briefing, speechwriter, leader, charisma, impeachment; in media: media holding, public relations, jammic, press release, hype, direct mail; in business language: business, boutique, shop, shopper (jobber), bill broker; in education: module, case, tutor, computer, laptop, site, modem, feedback; in sports: curling, driving, squash, bowling, surfing, cricket, skateboarding, baseball, bodybuilding, surfing, etc.; in the names of food, utensils, kitchen equipment: blender, sandwich maker, roast beef, toaster, barbecue, hot dog, pudding, mixer, sandwich, website, etc.; in art: pop art, rock, single, performance, break dance, blues, reggae, show, remake; in the field of tourism, services: dial meal, catering, motel, breakfast, cap cake, gel, skin pro, trimmer, soul, sponge, scrub, lifting, spray, tracking; in advertising: banner, sandwich, billboard, spam, brand, image, inclusive tour; in the information service: chat, site, file, interface, banner, bitch, script, byte, update, upgrade, game, click, smile, time, router, hard drive, peer, user; in the field of law enforcement: bailey, attorney, solicitor, voucher (criminal), halfbacker (lawyer); in the economy: market maker, provider, leasing, investment, deposit, pincode, bank, green card, dollar, cent, auction, profit, etc.
Journalists are concerned about the impact of English on the Kazakh language, its spread and growth. The reason for concern is the purity of the native language for the nation, the preservation of the language, the growing threat of its survival as a national language. Therefore, attention is inevitably paid to this problem. In the current language reform through the modernization of the Kazakh alphabet and its spelling, it is important to be guided by the principles of speaking other languages, established by the Alash intellectuals.
As a result, the differentiation of the Kazakh language into subsystems within itself has its own specifics, and not the same as other languages (Russian, English, and others). This is due to the established cultural, economic, political and social systems, relations, and domestic principles in Kazakh society. Kazakh society, like other societies, is a single national community that communicates with each other in the same language, without being tied up in one place, divided into groups and classes, without wearing the yoke of slavery, without being imprisoned. The social differentiation of the language of a single gene, which has been formed over these five centuries, does not allow even territorial differentiation. However, various changes and stagnation in Tsarist Russia and the Soviet era, as well as the processes of globalization and integration today, have an impact on the decline of the Kazakh language, as well as on the development and expansion of the Kazakh language. Both of these factors should be taken into account and studied from a scientific point of view in a conscious approach to the development of the Kazakh language.
*The article was written in the framework of grant funding for scientific and (or) scientific and technical projects for 2020–2022. The study was funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan (grant AP08956367).
- Abasilov, A.M. (2016). Aleumettіk lingvistika [Sociolinguistics]. Almaty: Asyl kіtap [in Kazakh].
- ter-minasova, s.g. (2018). Tіl zhane madenietaralyq kommunikatsiia [Language and intercultural communication]. Almaty: Ulttyk audarma biurosy [in Kazakh].
- Ikenov, А.I., & Zhusupova, A.D. (2004). Aleumettanu negіzderі [Basics of sociology]. Almaty: Ekonomika [in Kazakh].
- Belikov, V.I., Krysin, L.P. (2001). Sotsiolingvistika [Sociolinguistics]. Moscow: Izdatelskii tsentr RGGU [in Russian].
- Baitursynov, A. (1992). Tіl tagylymy: qazaq tіlі men oku-agartuga qatysty enbekterі [Language lessons: Oct. works on language and education]. Almaty: Ana tili [in Kazakh].
- Zhubanuly, K. (2013). Revoliutsiia zhane qazaqtyn ulttyq tіlі [Revolution and the Kazakh national language]. Almaty: Abzal-ai [in Kazakh].
- All-Union Turkological Congress 26: Azіrbaizhan gylymi zertteuler men zertteuler kogamy — Azerbaijan Society for Scientific Research and Research (26 aқpan — 6 nauryz). Baku [in Kazakh].
- Khasanuly, B. (1992). Ana tіlі — ata mura [Mother tongue is the ancestral heritage]. Almaty: Zhazushy [in Kazakh].
- Omarbekova, G.A. (2019). Тіl zhane zhaһandanu [Language and Globalization]. Nur-Sultan: «Fastprint» baspasy [in Kazakh].