Valentin Ivanovich Rassadin

Kalmyk State University, Department of the Kalmyk language and Mongolian studies, Director of the Mongolian and Altaistic research scientific centre,Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, 358000, the Republic of Kalmykia, Elista, Pushkin st., 11.

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/843

Abstract

This article is concerned with lexical parallels in the dairy cattle terminology in the Turkic and Mongol languages. It is also focused on the archetypes and etymology of the Turkic-Mongol parallels under study. In the course of the research we have analysed traditional Mongol languages and the Ancient Turkic language to check the etymological background of the modern Turkic words. The comparative analysis of the Turkic-Mongol parallels in dairy cattle terms embrace lexical units connected with reproductive cattle names, their physical features, cattle handling either in stalls or distant pastures, shepherds’ way of life, various forage grasses and watering points. As a result, we have concluded that these Turkic-Mongol parallels used in the Mongol languages are clearly of the Turkic origin. Therefore, the ancient Mongols borrowed the dairy cattle vocabulary from the Turkic peoples at the time of the Common Mongol protolanguage.

Keywords

the Mongol languages; the Turkic parallels; etymology; dairy cattle terms; reproductive cattle names; cattle handling; a distant pasture; forage grasses; cattle watering; loanwords

Download this article as: 

Copy the following to cite this article: Rassadin V. I. The Turkic and Mongol Lexical Units in Dairy Cattle Terms as Used in the Mongol Languages. Biomed Pharmacol J 2015;8(2)

Copy the following to cite this URL: Rassadin V. I. The Turkic and Mongol Lexical Units in Dairy Cattle Terms as Used in the Mongol Languages. Biomed Pharmacol J 2015;8(2). Available from: http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=3724

Introduction

Several generations of the Altaic scholars managed to find many similarities between the classical Altaic languages (Turkic, Mongol) and the Manchu-Tungus ones. It should be mentioned that most of these similarities were detected not in grammar but rather in vocabulary, however the final list of all these correspondences has not been made yet. At the same time many scientists stress out that the Turkic and Mongol languages have the biggest number of lexical and grammatical similarities. Thus, the Altaic scholar V.L. Kotvich [1962] pointed out that no less than 50% common elements of the Turkic and Mongol languages were found in their grammatical systems, while only 25% of them were traced in the vocabulary. Unfortunately, V.L. Kotvich did not make a list of such similarities, although it would be essential for further Altaic studies. In our opinion, the Altaic study aims at finding and analysing common lexical elements firstly between the Turkic and Mongol languages, and then among other Altaic languages. Linguists focus their attention on the lexical similarity between the Turkic and Mongol languages because they possess the biggest amount of common units in their vocabularies. This fact determined and promoted the hypothesis of a Turkic-Mongol protolanguage and later stipulated the formation and development of the Turkic-Mongol linguistics as a special field of comparative and Altaic studies.

We are convinced that the common vocabulary of the Turkic and Mongol languages should be analysed within thematic groups which embrace certain lexical units describing the key characteristics of the Turkic and Mongol ethnoses. At the moment all the necessary conditions have been formed for unraveling the Turkic-Mongol similarities as there are plenty of dictionaries of the Mongol and Turkic languages which contain full information on their current lexical status. Since the four-volumed “Mongol-Russian big academic dictionary” was published [2001; 2002] it became possible to obtain update lexical material on the modern Khalkha-Mongol language. The two-volumed “Buryat-Russian dictionary” [2010] also added new valuable information to K.M. Cheremisov’s “Buryat dictionary” [1973] and enabled scholars to have a better look at the modern Buryat language. The data on the modern Kalmyk language was taken from the “Kalmyk-Russian dictionary” [1977]. The source of information on the Ordos Mongolian language was A. Mostaert’s reprinted “Ordos dictionary” [2009]. In its turn, the lexical data on the languages of Inner Mongolia were obtained from B.Kh. Todaeva’s book “The language of Inner Mongolia” [1981], on the Dagur language – from B.Kh. Todaeva’s work “The Dagur language” [1986] and “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary” [2014]. The ancient written Mongol language was restored from the dictionaries of O. Kovalevskyi [1844-1849], K.F. Golstunskyi [1938] and F.D. Lessing [1960]. Due to the Mongol expansion and the reign of the Yuan dynasty from the 13^th to 14^th centuries almost every Turkic language got influenced by the Mongol language. Hence the modern Turkic languages are insufficient to pinpoint Turkic-Mongol parallels. Only the ancient Turkic works remained intact by the Mongol language, with their vocabulary fixed in the “Ancient Turkic dictionary” [1969].

If a lexical unit was present in the ancient Turkic language, is still used in the modern Turkic languages and has a Turkic protoform, it is most certainly a loanword from the Turkic languages and the foregoing factors serve as objective criteria for determining such borrowed lexical units.

Main body

This article dwells upon the Turkic-Mongol parallels as exemplified in dairy cattle terms currently used in the Mongol languages. The dairy cattle terminology comprises reproductive cattle names, cattle handling, distant pastures, forage grasses and watering points.

First of all, we should mention that the word mal (cattle), presented in the ancient Mongol language, dates back to the ancient Turkic word mal (property, fortune, wealth, goods) and is used in the modern Khalkha-Mongol, Buryat, Kalmyk languages, as well as the languages of Inner Mongolia (Chahar, Ordos and Dagur languages). The “Ancient Turkic dictionary” [1969, p. 335] states the Arabic origin of this word. When this word was acquired by the ancient Mongol language, its meaning changed to express the life of nomad cattle breeders who regarded cattle as their property, wealth and goods. This word is widely used in all Turkic languages in the meaning “goods’. The word mal in the Siberian Turkic languages which were influenced by the Mongol language acquired the meaning “cattle”.

The ancient Mongol word üker and its modern Khalkha-Mongol and Buryat counterpart ükher stand for “cattle, bull, cow, ox”. In the western Buryat dialects and the Kalmyk language this word usually denotes a “cow”.

In the Mongol languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar and Ordos) the word ükher denotes “cattle”. In the Dagur language B.Kh. Todaeva [1986, p. 179] has found the lexical unit khukur which means “cattle, cow, bull”. In the “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary” [2014, p. 191] the word khukur is used solely for “cattle”. In the ancient Turkic language there is a lexical analogue ӧküz, ӧgüz (bull, ox). The “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, p. 439-440] states that this word is widely used in all Turkic languages. The Altaic scholars compare it with the Mongol form üker which goes back to the Turkic protoform *(һ)ӧkez. The Mongol and other Bulgar languages within the Turkic group rhotacized this Common Turkic word. Since the modern Chuvash language has the lexical unit văkăr (bull, ox) and the Hungarian language possesses the similar word ökör, the ancient Bulgar language also had this word form. We can assume that the ancient Mongols adopted this word from one of the ancient Bulgar languages along with other dairy cattle terms.

A stud bull is described in the Mongol languages in the following way: buqa in ancient Mongol, bukh in Khalkha-Mongol and the languages of Inner Mongolia, bukha in Buryat and Ordos, bukh [bukhă] in Kalmyk and bak in Dagur, according to B.Kh. Todaeva [1986, p. 123]. In the ancient Turkic language this Common Mongol word correlates with buqa (stud bull). Thus, this lexical unit is present in all Turkic languages in different forms: buγa, puγa, buqa, poqa, boγa, poγa, bїqa and stands for a “stud bull” [Sevortyan, 1978, pp. 230-232]. The Turkic protoform *buqa has been restored in “The comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, p. 437-438]. All Altaic scholars usually compare these Turkic and Mongol words.

A reproductive milk cow is called ünijen in ancient Mongol, in Khalkha-Mongol and the languages of Inner Mongolia, ünee in Chahar and Ordos, un´ee in Dagur according to B.Kh. Todaeva [1986, p. 171], üneen in literary Buryat, üneen in the Elyut dialect of the Kalmyk language as stated by G.J. Ramstedt [1935, p. 458] or üngn [üngӗn] as it is given in the “Kalmyk-Russian dictionary” [1977, p. 551]. The latter form denotes “a female of wild animals, birds; a female fox”, while “a first-calf cow” is its archaic meaning. The Mongol protoform of this word is *ünigen. On the one hand, it consists of the root *üni- and the affix –gen (for instance, the Mongol word temegen (camel) goes back to the ancient Turkic tebä and has the same affix). On the other hand, it is built from the root *ünig and the affix –en which is usually added to nominal stems in most Mongol languages. In the ancient Turkic language the meaning “a cow” or “a female turtle” was conveyed by the forms inäk or iŋäk. The first meaning was adopted by all Turkic languages and then phonetically changed into the following lexical units: inek, inäk, nek, ijnek, ijneg, enek, їnakh, annakh, ingek, inkek, iŋek, ĕne [Sevortyan, 1974, pp. 358-359].

E.V. Sevortyan expresses different opinions on the etymology of this lexical unit but comments that this Turkic word is usually compared with the Mongol one ünigen [1976, pp. 359-360]. He also mentions the Hungarian word ünö for “a cow” which is similar to the Chuvash one ĕne. This etymological source and the protoform *in(i)gäk have been proved by the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, pp. 436-437].

In the ancient Mongol language a calf crop or young stock was called töl. The same form töl still remains in Khalkha-Mongol, Kalmyk and the languages of Inner Mongolia, including Chahar and Buryat (though, it is pronounced as tül).

This Mongol word should be compared with the ancient Turkic noun töl “the time of delivery; a calf” which is derived from the ancient Turkic verb törü= “to descend from, appear, be born, emerge, give birth to someone”. Besides, this ancient Turkic verb “to give birth, be born, apper, emerge” has several analogues in kindred languages: tör= in Khalkha-Mongol, türe= in Buryat, tör= in Kalmyk, törü in ancient written Mongol and törӧ in all the languages of Inner Mongolia.

A calf from birth till one year, regardless of its sex, is described as tuγul in ancient written Mongol, tugal in Buryat, tugl in Kalmyk, tugal in Khalkha-Mongol and the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar), tugul in Ordos, tokul´ in Dagur according to the “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary” [2014, p. 157].

We did not manage to trace this word in the ancient Mongol language. However, we can suppose that this lexical unit originated from the Turkic languages. For instance, the root –tuq derives from the Common Turkic verb toγ // tuγ “to be born” (from ancient Turkic toγ “to be born, emerge, appear, rise”), while the affix –ul is a lambdaistic variant of the word-building affix –їš/-uš which is used to convert verbs into nouns in Turkic languages. These lambdaistic variants are common for all Turkic languages within the Bulgar group. We can prove this viewpoint by analysing the word toγuš (a roe deer calf), recorded by V.V. Radov in the language of Barabinsky Tatars [Radlov. Vol. III, p. 1165].

A calf older than one year, regardless of its sex, is called biraγu in ancient Mongol, burun in Buryat, bjaruu in Khalkha-Mongol and the languages of Inner Mongolia, beruu in Kharchin, biruu in Ordos. In the Kalmyk language the word bürü means “a bull-calf from one year till two”. The archetype of this Mongol word is *bїraγu. This word form should be regarded as a rotacised analogue of the ancient Turkic lexical unit buzaγ, buzaγu (a calf). Rotacised analogues are typical of the Bulgar group within the Turkic languages: părau (a calf) in modern Chuvash, bїzau in Tatar and bїҙau in Bashkir. E.V. Sevortyan speaks about the Turkic etymology of this word and stresses out its homogeneous connection with the Mongol form biraγu [1978, pp. 239-242]. This Common Turkic word is widely used in different phonetic forms like buzaγu, buzaγї, buzaγ, buzaqї, buzavu, bїzaγu, bїzaγї, buzaa, puzaa, puzuu, bїzaa, pїzaa,  bozaγu, boozu, pozou, pozu, bozu, buzu, buzav, buzau, bїzau, bїzov, buzuv, buzoo, bїzoo, bozov, muzov, muzoo, părau and etc. The same information is given in the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” where *buzaγu is stated as the Turkic archetype for this word [2001, pp. 438-439].

Since an udder is the most distinctive characteristic of a cow which produces milk, its name should also be analysed in all Mongol languages. Thus, a cow’s udder is called deleŋ in ancient Mongol, Khalkha-Mongol and all the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar), delen(g) in Buryat, delŋ in Kalmyk, delin in Dagur according to the “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary” [2014, p. 63]. This Mongol term correlates with the ancient Turkic one jelin (an udder). E.V. Sevortyan proves that this word is widely used in all Turkic languages in the following forms jelin / ǰelin and is similar to the Mongol word deleŋ [1989, pp. 180-181]. The same viewpoint is expressed in the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary”, with *jelin given as the Turkic protoform.

The main function of a cow is giving milk, for this purpose it should be milked. This activity is described in the ancient written Mongol language with the help of the verb saγa. The similar verb form saa= is used in Khalkha-Mongol, Kalmyk, the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar and Ordos) and Dagur according to B.Kh. Todaeva’s works [1986, p. 161] and the “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary” [2014, p. 138]. This word is pronounced as haa in Buryat and taa in the languages of Inner Mongolia Durbet and Jalait, respectively [Todaeva, 1981, p. 188]. The Mongol form corresponds with the ancient Turkic one saγ (to milk). Its Common Turkic character and connection with the Mongol word saγa is explained in the “Etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages” [2003, pp. 137-140].

Generally, cows are bred for producing milk. This product (milk) is known as sün, üsün in ancient Mongol, süü(n) in Khalkha-Mongol, the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar), tüü in Jalait and Durbet, üsü in Ordos, һün in literary Buryat, üһen in the western Buryat dialect, üsn in Kalmyk and suu in Dagur according to B.Kh. Todaeva’s works [1986, p. 164] and the “Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionaty” [2014, p. 146]. This Mongol word form can be compared with the ancient Turkic one süt which is typical of all Turkic languages. Its connection with the Mongol word sün is stated in the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, pp. 448-449]. The Common Turkic protoform for this word looked like *sü:t.

During year-first spring lactation cows give colostral milk which is called uγuraγ in ancient Mongol, uurag in Khalkha-Mongol, Buryat, the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar and Ordos), uurg in Kalmyk. The Turkic analogue of this Mongol form is the ancient Turkic word oγuz (the first milk, colostrum). The Mongol form comprises two elements: the affix –aγ and the root uγur. The latter one is a rotacised variant of Turkic oγuz. This linguistic feature is typical of the ancient Turkic languages within the Bulgar group and shows that this word was probably borrowed from them. E.V. Sevortyan mentions that this word is connected with the Mongol form uurag and is widely used in the modern Turkic languages: obuz, oguz, agїz [1974, pp. 405-407].

Let’s analyse the terms which are concerned with cattle handling. Although they originated from the ancient Turkic language, they are still used in Mongol languages. For example, the Kalmyk word otlg [otlăg] (a cattle creep for feeding) has the ancient Turkic analogue otluq (a washtub for forage). This word is derived from the ancient Turkic form ot (grass, greens used as forage) with the help of the Turkic affix –luq.

There is qashija (a fence, hedge, pale, household, courtyard, cattle handling) in ancient Mongol, khashaa(n) in Khalkha-Mongol, khashaa in languages of Inner Mongolia, gashaa in Ordos, khashaa in Buryat, khasha in Kalmyk, khashi which is derived from the Mongol verb qashi (to surround, enclose) in Dagur according to B.Kh. Todaeva’s works [1986, p. 175]. The Mongol protoform is *qasїγa, with the root *qasї correlating with the ancient Turkic word qasї (a stall made of sticks). According to the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, pp. 525-526], the Turkic noun qasї is derived from the hypothetical Turkic verb *qas which is distantly connected with the Mongol one qashi. The modern Turkic forms: qashaa, qažaan, qashaga, qažagan, qasha, khaza (a stockyard, fence) are loanwords borrowed from the Mongol language.

Cattle drive to summer pastures is a key event in the life of nomad cattle breeders. There are several lexical units to describe a herd of cows: sürüg in ancient Mongol, süreg in Khalkha-Mongol, the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar), türeg in Jalait and Durbet, sürüg in Ordos, hüreg in Buryat, sürg [sürĕg] in Kalmyk. Its ancient Turkic analogue sürüg (a herd) is derived from the ancient Turkic verb sür (to lead, ride, follow; be engaged in, produce, carry out; pull, drag, live, tear off, tie up). There is no derived stem in the Mongol languages, therefore the word sürüg is definitely originated from Turkic.

The two forms otur in ancient Mongol and otor in Khalkha-Mongol stand for “cattle grazing on distant pastures; fresh spring grass; a pasture; cattle enclosing”. The word otor conveys the meaning “cattle grazing on distant pastures” in the languages of Inner Mongolia, including Chahar. The lexical unit otor is used in the meaning of “a summer stall; hunters’ lodge; a summer farm; a distant pasture” in the Kabansky dialect of the Buryat language. The word otor means “a fishers’ hut on the bank of Lake Baikal” in the Kudarinsky dialect of the Buryat language. The form otr [otăr] denotes “a distant place (about a pasture)” in Kalmyk. This Mongol word can be compared with the Turkic one otar (a pasture; a pasture which is far from a village; cattle grazing; a meadow; a farm; a flock). The Mongol form can vary from otar to otor, odar, odor and utar. E.V. Sevortyan has revealed its Turkic etymology and marked the Turkic root ot (grass) [1974, pp. 487-488].

It is worth mentioning that houses of Mongol shepherds located on distant summer pastures are called alcag. In the ancient Mongol language this building was described as alchaγ and stood for “a shelter, hut, cabin, booth”. The word alachu with a similar meaning (a tent, pavilion) has been found in “The secret tale of Mongols” written in 1240 [Kozin, 1941, p. 580]. This Mongol word has the Turkic analogue alachu (a pavilion) which has several phonetic variants in the Turkic languages: alaǰїq, alaǰuq, alachїq, alachuq, alachїkh, alasїq, їlashїq, ulachiq, alashїq, alacїq, alanchїq, alaǰї, alachu, lashїq (a tent, pavilion, felted tent, small felted tent, reindeer skin tent, pole for a reindeer skin tent, nomads’ tent, hut, cabin, shepherds’ house made of branches and straw mats, hayshed, cowshed, cattle yard and etc.) [Sevortyan, 1974, p. 130-132]. More information on the word *alachu in the Turkic languages can be obtained from the “Comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” [2001, p. 497].

Shepherds on distant pastures used a hearth for cooking their meals. Basically, they gathered three stones and put a cauldron with boiling water on their top. This tool is called ocog in Khalkha-Mongol or оčuγ in ancient Mongol. In the ancient Turkic language there were the similar forms otčuq, оčuq, očaq (a hearth, oven) which had been derived from the Common Turkic stem ot (fire). E.V. Sevortyan dwelled upon its etymology and the Common Turkic features in the “Etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages” [1974, pp. 422-425].

In our opinion, the list of cattle dairy terms should be expanded with words denoting distant pastures which are used for grazing cattle during summer. Among these terms there are the names of basic forage grasses since they grow on pastures and are of great importance for cattle breeders. Thus, wheatgrass and its sorts, particularly sedge, are regarded as one of the most nutritious forage grasses. These grasses have different names in the Mongol languages: kijaγ in ancient Mongol, khjag in Buryat, khiag in Khalkha-Mongol, kh´aag in the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar) according to B.Kh. Todaeva’s works [1981, p. 233], sh´aag in Jarud, Aru-Khorchin, Naiman, Tumut, kaag in Ordos (sedge or wild rye). The protoform of this Mongol word has been reconstructed in the following way: *qїjaγ. Its Turkic analogue qїjaq is widely used in all Turkic languages but conveys such different meanings as ling, sedge, wheatgrass or ragged leaves of graminaceous plants. This Turkic noun is derived from the Common Turkic verb qїj= (to cut aslant). The “etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages” reveals the Turkic-Mongol parallels and stresses out their etymological sources.

Ling is another sort of grass which grows in humid climate and has good nutritious characteristics. It is known as ӧlüŋ (common ling; dense grass) in ancient Mongol, ӧlӧn in Khalkha-Mongol, ӧlöŋ in the languages of inner Mongolia (including Chahar), ülen übhen in Buryat, ӧln caγan övsn in Kalmyk. F.D. Lessing gives the form ӧleŋ and defines it as “soft grass; dense grass; ling” [1960, p. 633], G.J. Ramstedt gives the word ölŋ (fresh grass; a meadow) in his Kalmyk dictionary [1935, p. 295], S. Kozin mentions the form olaŋ (grass sward) in the “Secret tale” [1941, p. 585]. This Mongol word form to the ancient Turkic lexical unit öläŋ (a lawn; grass). E.V. Sevortyan emphasises the Common Turkic origin of the Mongol word ӧleŋ (grass, soft grass; non-nutritious grass which grows in places without flowing water; ling; a pasture, meadow, cattle grazing) in his “Etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages” [1974, pp. 527-528]. The “comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. Vocabulary” gives the archetype *ӧlӧŋ (grass; a meadow, lawn; ling; mat-grass; a graminaceous plant) and proves that it originated from the hypothetical Turkic verb *ӧl which is homogeneous with the Common Turkic adjective ӧl (damp, humid).

Steppe pastures are covered with other sorts of plants which do not belong to the group of forage grasses. Their Mongol names have the Turkic parallels and etymological sources. For instance, the ancient Mongol word baldarγana ~ balčirγana (cow parsnip) correlates with the Turkic one baltїrγan which is derived from the Turkic noun baltїr (shin, calf). The ancient Mongol form qilγana (mat-grass) has also the Turkic analogue qїlγan which is derived from qїl (horse hair).

Natural points for cattle watering are considered to be rivers and springs. The Mongol word for a river γol has the ancient Turkic parallel qol (a valley, especially a river valley), while the Common Mongol name of a spring bulaγ has the ancient Turkic analogue bulaq (a spring; canal; irrigation channel).

Artificial watering points are mostly represented by wells which are the only place in a steppe or desert to water cattle. A well is called quduγ in ancient Mongol, khudag in Khalkha-Mongol and the languages of Inner Mongolia (including Chahar), khuduk in Ordos, khudag in Buryat, khudg in Kalmyk. This Mongol word correlates with the ancient Turkic one quduγ (a well) which has two phonetic variants quδuγ and qujuγ. In its turn, the Turkic word is derived from the verb qud//quj (to pour, fill with water).

Conclusion

The comparative analysis of Turkic-Mongol dairy cattle terms conducted above has shown that this lexical group is truly diverse since it comprises reproductive cattle names, cattle physical characteristics connected with the ability to give milk and milk as the product of this process, cattle handling and grazing terms, special words for shepherds’ houses, the food cooked over the campfire, forage grasses and watering points. The research is based on the study of many Mongol languages which are characterised by traditional historical development and took after their ancient forms influenced by the Turkic languages from the Bulgar group. The above-mentioned dairy cattle terminology is the result of this influence. We have excluded such post-Yuan Mongol languages as Mongour, Dongxiang, Bonan and the languages of Afghan Mongols since these languages were greatly influenced by the languages of local people – Tibetans, Chinese, Afghans and many others. As a result, we had to refer to the ancient Turkic language in order to find the Turkic-Mongol parallels in the dairy cattle terminology. This analysis has revealed the Turkic character and etymology of these terms and enabled us to conclude that these terms were borrowed from the Turkic languages. The data given above proves that ancient Mongols adopted dairy cattle breeding and its rich terminology from ancient Bulgar tribes. In the future this thematic group should include terms for cattle economic use and dairy products. This expansion will give more thorough understanding of the Turkic influence on the Mongol languages. To sum it up, we would like to express our gratitude to the Mongol colleagues, particularly the member of the Academy of Sciences L. Bolda, for providing us with the necessary data on the Mongol languages.

References

1. Mongol-Russian big academic dictionary. Volume I, II, (2001). Moscow.
2. Mongol-Russian big academic dictionary. Volume IV. (2002). Moscow.
3. Golstunskyi, K.F. (1938). Mongol-Russian dictionary. Leningrad. Old Turkic dictionary. (1969). Leningrad.
4. Munieva, B.D. (Ed.). (1977). Kalmyk-Russian dictionary.
5. Radlov, V.V. (1888-1911). The dictionary of Turkic dialects. Vol. I– Saint Petersburg.
6. Kovalevskyi, O. (1844-1849). Mongol-Russian-French dictionary. Vol. I–III.
7. Kozin, S.A. (1941). A secret tale. The Mongol chronicles of 1240 entitled Mongol-un niγuča tobčiyan. Юань чао би ши (Yuan chao bi shi). The collection of the Mongol everyday life stories. Moscow; Leningrad.
8. Kotvich, V. (1962). The research of the Altaic languages.
9. Abridged Dagur-Russian dictionary. (2014). Ulan-Ude.
10. Sevortyan, E.V. (1974). The etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages (stem vowels in the Common Turkic language and other languages within its group). Moscow: Science.
11. Sevortyan, E.V. (1978). The etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages. B-stems in the Common Turkic language and other languages within its group. Moscow: Science.
12. The comparative grammar of the Turkic languages. (2001). Vocabulary. Moscow.
13. Todaeva, B.Kh. (1981). The language of Inner Mongolia. The data and dictionary.
14. Todaeva, B.Kh. (1986). The Dagur language. Moscow.
15. Cheremisov, K.M. (1973). Buryat-Russian dictionary.
16. Shagdarov, L.D., & Cheremisov, K.M. (2010). Buryat-Russian dictionary in two volumes. Volume I: A-N. Volume: II O-Z. Ulan-Ude.
17. The etymological dictionary of the Turkic languages. L-M-N-P-S-stems in the Common Turkic language and other languages within its group. (2003). Moscow: Science.
18. Lessing, F.D. (1960). Mongolian-English Dictionary. Berkley; Los Angeles.
19. Mostaert, A. (2009). Dictionnaire Ordos. Troisieme edition A-Ž Tables alphabetiques.
20. Ramstedt, G.J. (1935). Kalmükisches Wӧrterbuch. Helsinki.

(Visited 738 times, 1 visits today)