In March 1952, at the Institute of Language and Literature Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR was a discussion on the major issues of the Kazakh linguistics, has attracted considerable interest among the public not only in Kazakhstan but also in neighboring Central Asian republics.
In discussion were made the following reports: 1) Report of the current member of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR Professor NT Sauranbaeva on «status and some important problems of development of linguistics in Kazakhstan»; 2) Report Cand.Phil.Sci GG Musabaeva on «Formation and development of Kazakh literary language and issues of the Kazakh dialectology»; 3) Report of the Doctor of Philology MB Balakayeva on «Issues of Kazakh graphics and spelling.» These reports have raised basic questions of Kazakh linguistics, as well) on the formation of the Kazakh language, b) on the basis of the Kazakh literary language, c) of the dialects of the Kazakh language, d) to clarify the composition of the Kazakh alphabet, d) to clarify and improve the rules of spelling.
During the discussion of the reports turned marrovskogo wing criticism of errors contained in the works of some Kazakh linguists. However, the results of the discussion, it was noted that the most active followers of the so-called «new doctrine» of the language. (SA Amanzholov Kenesbay SK, MB Balakan GG Musabaev et al.) With sufficient determination and dramatically revealed their past mistakes, did not give a comprehensive and in-depth analysis, but their work is still there has been no decisive turn to fruitful research work on the basis of Stalin’s theory of language.
In discussing the report active participation of secondary school teachers, university teachers and employees of research institutes of the Kazakh SSR, linguists neighboring fraternal republics: Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Karakalpakstan and Bashkortostan, as well as representatives of the USSR AP.
Professor NT Sauranbayev in his report stressed the utmost importance of labor and Stalin for the Kazakh linguistics and made an attempt to analyze the mistakes made by the Kazakh linguists in the period of so-called «new doctrine» of the language. He highlighted the activities of Kazakh linguists and academic institutions aimed at the implementation of the most important objectives of Stalin. He stressed that not all Kazakh linguists have begun to creative use of Stalinist theory of language in their studies in the Kazakh language, is no one big scientific work, which would be successfully implemented indication IV Stalin. Noting its own theoretical confusion in the understanding of the problems of dialects in matters of crossing language — errors associated with the adoption of the concept of Marr, a professor pointed out that many Kazakh linguists still have not opened their theoretical mistakes and did not give a complete and comprehensive analysis.
Report Cand.Phil.Sci GG Musabaeva was very general in nature. Speaker touched many of the problems of Kazakh linguistics, but stopped primarily on three issues: a) the genesis of the Kazakh language, b) the formation of the Kazakh literary language, and c) of the dialects of the Kazakh language.
Quite controversial was approved by the rapporteur that the basis of the language of the Kazakh nation lay language uysunskogo tribe, which allegedly included in the Kipchak community. The discussion showed that this thesis raises serious objections. During discussions on the formation of literary Kazakh language turned out that the rapporteur, as did some other linguists Kazakhstan confuses two different issues: the issue of education of Kazakh popular language and its further development as a national language and the question of the formation of modern Kazakh literature language.
The debate clarified the role in the formation of the Kazakh literary language of the Kazakh people of outstanding educators and Abay Ibrai Altynsarin. They gave a powerful impetus to the development of the Kazakh written literary language, in contrast to the poets, scribes, whose language, as we know, was based on the basis of the whole people and was full of the elements of class jargon.
In this regard it should be noted the fallacy of the position of the speaker supposedly existed Kazakh literary language doabaevskogo period, representatives of which supposedly were the feudal poets scribes.
Finally, GG Musabaev came to the correct conclusion that, due to lack of historical conditions, the language of the Kazakh people to the Great October Socialist Revolution could not develop to the level of the national language. So he began only after the October Revolution.
In discussing the report on the GG Musabaeva discussions it became clear that there are two points of view regarding the composition of the Kazakh dialects and dialects. Most linguists Kazakhstan believes that the colloquial Kazakh language represented by a number of dialects, which are far enough has not been studied and are not defined as the boundary of their territorial distribution.
Essentially only the professor SA Amanzholov defended the thesis of the debate on the presence of three dialects of the Kazakh language, which correspond to the old territorial division of society into three Kazakh Horde. Most participants spoke against this view and rejected it.
According to the report by Professor NT Sauranbaeva and Cand.Phil.Sci GG Musabaeva it acted more than twenty participants, who stood on the general theoretical issues relating to the comparative historical method, history and dialectology of the Kazakh language (Doskaraev, Myshanov, Sanjeev, Kalybaeva, Baskakov , Mashkov, Davkaraev, Amanzholov et al.), as well as on the issues of formation of the Kazakh literary language (Khasanov, Ergaliyev, Auezov, Kamalov, Amanzholov, Sanjeev, Balakan, and others.) and practical issues of the Kazakh linguistics (Ermekov, Ergaliyev, Kasambekov etc. .).
The report of Doctor of Philology MB Balakayeva was devoted to the Kazakh alphabet and spelling. Speaker tabled the issue of establishing a new alphabetical order, according to which any additional signs to the Russian alphabet for specific Kazakh sounds are not followed at the end of the alphabet, as it was before, and for the relevant close on schedule sign. He also called for the exclusion of signs KS and t, since, in his view, the sounds ks and t could be successfully designated common to them and the relevant more front consonant signs k and g, the pronunciation of which can be controlled vocalism word, and with the exception of mark h, and its replacement by a general sign of x. The speaker also offers a combination of first diphthongal denoted by a single letter, and (for example, instead of zhina- zhyyna- «gather»), by analogy with the combination іy, which in Kazakh spelling is also designated by a single letter, and (for example, instead of kіyіm kiіm «clothes»).
According to the report of the MB on 22 Balakayeva panelist. The establishment of a new order of the Kazakh alphabet, the removal of the alphabet, h, has been approved, on the other proposals of the Rapporteur spelling opinions are divided.
During the discussion, some linguists, it was suggested the need for removal of not only the letters KS and t and replacing them with common characters to and g, as well as the letters i and u, which could successfully be designated common and familiar. In this regard, it would be eliminated and the issue of a special designation of the first and diphthongs іy means and, as a result words like zhyyna- kiyim written and would reflect all the cash in the words of phonemes. Those linguists have made a proposal for the designation of bilabial consonant (in the words of the tau «mountain» uakyt «time» and so on.) Of the total for the sound and labiodental in the letter to.
However, most speakers did not agree with these proposals and voted for the preservation of the existing principles of spelling, as well as for the approval of the proposal to designate the sign not only combinations іy yіy and, as it was in the pre-existing spell, but also combinations of first and yy.
Institute of Language and Literature intends to further address the issue of the schedule and the spelling of the Kazakh language based on the comments of all speakers at the discussion of linguists and submit it for discussion of the general public.
After the final word MB Balakayeva the director of the Institute of Language and Literature Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR AI Iskakov, who summed up the debate. He noted that this discussion took place at a higher level than all other discussion of the Kazakh linguistics that took place earlier in the Kazakh SSR, and that the participants in the debate have made a lot of valuable and interesting in the resolution of the issues raised.
The discussion, as pointed out by AI Iskakov, raised a number of issues of Kazakh linguistics, and in particular, the issues of comparative-historical study of the Turkic languages, relationship issues of the Kazakh language to the ancient Turkic languages and so on.
Finally, AI Iskakov called on all participants in the debate to make every effort to ensure that the final error-free marrovskogo wing by a bold, principled Bolshevist criticism and self-criticism and analysis of errors, based on the deep study and assimilation of the theory and methodology of Marxism-Leninism and brilliant works of Stalin on linguistics.