An Analysis of the Entrance of Turkish Words into Persian: The Case Study of “Dastur-e Shahriaran”

Iranian and Turkic-speaking peoples have been in contact with each other since a long time ago. Undoubtedly, this contact has had linguistic effects too, the most visible of which is the lexical borrowings of Persian and Turkish ​​from each other. Throughout the history of Iran, the entrance of words from some languages ​​into the Persian language has been widespread. For example, Arabs rule over Iran paved the way for the introduction of many Arabic words into the Persian language, especially in religious and scientific fields. In the recent two centuries, many words from European languages, namely French and English, have entered the Persian. In this research, through examining text of a books from the Safavid period, “Dasture-e Shahriaran”, written by Mohammad Ibrahim bin Zain-al-Abdin Nasiri, I try to answer two questions: a. Regarding the corpus in question, the Turkish words entered into the Persian, to what lexical fields do belong? b. What explanation can be given for the use of these Turkish words in the Persian during the Safavid period, and for most of them become archaic now?

The data of this research come from the book “Dastur-e Shahriaran”, one of the important surviving texts from the Safavid period. To extract data, the whole book was read and Turkish words and words that were partially Turkish were extracted, categorized, reviewed and analyzed according to the goals of the article. Since the analysis, generalizations and conclusions of the article are based on paying attention to the data on the one hand, and considering macro factors such as the longtime neighborhood of the Iranian and Turkic-speaking peoples, on the other hand, the methodology of this article is a combination of inductive and comparative methodology; and its method is a combination of descriptive and analytical methods.Tietze (1967) shows that Persian words entered Anatolian Turkish in different fields. Findley (2005: 45) has repeatedly pointed out the longtime relations between the Turkic ​​and Iranian people and their ethnic and cultural ties, and considers a number of ancient Turkish words, such as "khaqan" and "bag", to be derived from the Sogdian, as an Iranian language. Aydenlu (2016: 12), referring to Doerfer, has pointed out the identification of 2135 Turkish and Mongolian words in Persian. Findings of Aydenlu (2019) also confirm the use of Turkish words in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh. This worth noting, from the point of view the goals Ferdowsi had for writing the Shahnameh. He tried to express his words in Persian as much as possible; and therefore, existence of Turkish words in Ferdowsi language shows the longtime ties between Turkic and Iranian peoples. 

Based on the analysis of the data, some general points can be stated:The first point is that there are many Turkish words in the text in question, in some cases their spelling is close to their Turkish pronunciation. For example, the word ‘Uzbek’ is written in the same way in the text; however, in today's Persian writing, this word is written and pronounced as ‘ozbak’ which shows that the Turkish words entered into Persian have been adapted to its phonological and phonetic system.The second point is that some words entered from Turkish into Persian (for example, ‘ilchi’ and ‘qazlbash’) have a combined construction in Turkish (‘il’ + ‘-chi’; ‘qezl’ + ‘bash’). But in Persian, they are treated as non-combined and simple words, because the meaning of their parts is not known to Persian speakers. However, the Turkish suffix ‘-chi’ was added to non-Turkish words and gave words such as ‘Toqchi’ and ‘Charkhchi’.The third point is that elements of the Turkish have been used in making a group of words in the corpus of the research. Some of these elements are interesting because their widespread use in a period of the history of Persian has caused them to gradually behave like suffixes in this language. One of these elements is ‘bashi’. This element has been used in many words in the corpus, and it is also used in a number of modern Turkish varieties. This Turkish element is also used in Dasture-e Shahriaran with many non-Turkish words and has given the meaning of ‘chief’, ‘great’ and ‘commander’ to the base to which it is added.The fourth point is that the borrowing of Turkish and Persian languages ​​from each other has been bilateral. In fact, although in some areas, Persian has borrowed numerous words and expressions from Turkish, in other areas such as literary and poetic creation, Turkish has borrowed many words from Persian. This is clearly evident in the Turkish poem in the opening pages of Dastur-e Shahriaran.

Analysis of the research corpus showed that in some fields, Turkish words have entered Persian collectively. In some examined words, we see the presence of Turkish and Persian elements together, which has caused the formation of incomplete or hybrid loanwords in the Persian. The extensive presence of Turkish elements in the corpus of this research and other historical texts like it, is a proof for the longtime contact between Persian and Turkish languages. However, the presence of Turkish elements in the Persian texts of the Safavid period is also a consequence of the Safavid family being Turkish-speaking and their almost constant relations and conflicts with their Turkic neighbors in the west and northeast of Iran. Persian language has borrowed mostly nouns from Turkish. On the other hand, most of the Turkish elements in the research corpus are not used in today's Persian. The reason for this is the change of political and social relations in Iran in the recent two centuries. This is not specific to Iran and Persian, and something like it can be seen about many Persian and Arabic elements in Istanbul Turkish. Also, some of the Turkish elements in the body of the research, although are not completely obsolete in Persian now, signs of becoming archaic are evident on their face.