1897-1059 Remarks on the phonetic value of the letters ‹y› and ‹ü› in Franciscus Meninski’s Ottoman Turkish Thesaurus (1680) Stachowski Marek author Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie 03bqmcz70 Correspondence to: Marek Stachowski marek.stachowski@uj.edu.pl 11 09 2012 Volume 129, Issue 3 2012 189 197 Copyright © 2012 2012 <p>Franciscus Meninski generally used the letter ‹y› as a symbol for today’s Turkish ı. However, this letter also appears in front vocalic words which contradicts the palato-velar aspect of Turkish vowel harmony. Mertol Tulum has recently attempted to show that the phonetic value of ‹y› in front vocalic words was a central, high vowel placed between the Turkish i and ı (one that would probably be rendered [ɨ] in the IPA; however, since this letter is barely visible in print, especially in the footnotes, I have decided to replace it with its Fenno-Ugristic equivalent [i] here). The present author, thus, examines Tulum’s line of reasoning and dicusses the possibility of reinterpreting the functions fulfilled by ‹y› and ‹ü› in Meninski’s work.</p> 1 Adamović M. 1985. Konjugationsgeschichte der türkischen Sprache. Leiden. de Carbognano C. C. 1794. Primi principi della Grammatica Turca ad uso dei missionari apostolici di Costantinopoli. Roma. 2 Develi H. 1995. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesine göre 17. yüzyıl Osmanlı Türkçesinde ses benzeşmeleri ve uyumlar. Ankara. 3 Develi H. 1998. 18. yüzyıl Türkiye Türkçesi üzerine. – Doğu Akdeniz 1: 27–36. 4 Duman M. 1995a. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesine göre 17. yüzyılda ses değişmeleri. Ankara. 5 Duman M. 1995b. Türkiye Türkçesi’nin tarihî kaynaklarından Carbognano’nun grameri ve imlâ-telaffuz ilişkisi bakımından önemi. – İlmî Araştırmalar 1: 95–106. 6 Duman M. 2005. Klâsik Osmanlı Türkçesi döneminde dil uyumuna aykırı örnekler üzerine. – Siemieniec-Gołaś E., Pomorska M. (eds). Turks and non-Turks. Studies on the history of linguistic and cultural contacts [= Studia Turcologica Cracoviensia 10 = Festschrift forS. Stachowski]. Kraków: 85–90. 7 Heffening W. 1942. Die türkischen Transkriptionstexte des Bartholomaeus Georgievits aus den Jahren 1544–1548. Ein Beitrag zur historischen Grammatik des Osmanisch-Türkischen. Leipzig. 8 Knüppel M. 2009. (rev.) Öztopçu 2007. – Journal of Oriental and African Studies 18: 341–342. 9 Németh J. 1965. Die Türken von Vidin Budapest. 10 Öztopçu K. (ed.) 2007. Festschrift in honor of András J. E. Bodrogligeti [= Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları 17]. İstanbul. 11 Podolak B. 1990. Die türkische Sprache in Breve compendium fidei Catholicae Turcico textu (1721) von Michał Ignacy Wieczorkowski (1). – Zeszyty Naukowe UJ CMLXII. Prace Językoznawcze 101: 97–114. 12 Podolak B. 1995. Der Transkriptionstext von Michał Ignacy Wieczorkowski Breve compendium fidei Catholicae Turcico textu… (1721). – Studia Turcologica Cracoviensia 1: 23–89. 13 Pomorska M. 1995. New Persian and Arabic loan words in the Azeri dialect of Tabriz. – Folia Orientalia 31: 71–88. 14 Prokosch E. 1980. Studien zur Grammatik des Osmanisch-Türkischen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Vulgärosmanisch-Türkischen. Freiburg. 15 Rocchi L. 2009. Il lessico turco nell’opera di Bernardino Pianzola. Materiali per la conoscenza del turco parlato di fine Settecento. Trieste. 16 Stachowski K. 2011. Remarks on usefulness of different types of transcriptions, with a particular regard to Turkic comparative studies. – Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 93: 303–338. 17 Stachowski S. 2000. François à Mesgnien Meninski ve Thesaurus Linguarum Orientalium (in: MenL xiii-xxii) = François à Mesgnien Meninski und sein Thesaurus Linguarum Orientalium (in: MenL xxiii-xxxiv). 18 Tulum M. 2007. Meninski’ye göre XVII. yüzyıl İstanbul Türkçesi’nde /ı/ ünlüsü. – Öztopçu 2007: 345–357. 19 Zajączkowski A. 1934. Studja nad językiem staroosmańskim, I: Wybrane ustępy z anatolijsko-tureckiego przekładu Kalili i Dimny || Études sur la langue vieille-osmanlie, I: Morceaux choisis de la traduction turque-anatolienne de Calila et Dimna. Kraków. 20 Zajączkowski A. 1936: List turecki Sulejmana I do Zygmunta Augusta w ówczesnej transkrypcji i tłumaczeniu polskiem z r. 1551. – Rocznik Orjentalistyczny 12: 91–118.