In the first eight months of my project, I conducted a literature review on the research topic and created a database of Mongolian borrowings in Kyrgyz. In this database, the phonetic, morphological and semantic changes that Mongolian borrowings underwent in their transition to Kyrgyz were also recorded. In addition, I have determined the general criteria of the borrowings in Kyrgyz language that are considered to be of Mongolian origin. I presented the results of my work from this period in three scientific events in Mainz (Germany), Siirt, and Istanbul (Turkey).
In the second stage of my project, I examined the so-called etymologically common words for Turkic and Mongolian languages. During this period, I could show with new examples from Kyrgyz that the lexical units that were considered common to both language groups were actually copied from Turkic to Mongolic at various times, and that most of them were later transferred back into Turkic languages. This situation had also been examined by researchers such as J. G. Ramstedt, G. Clauson, G. Doerfer, A. M. Scherbak, and V. Rassadin. However, within the scope of this project, Mongolian borrowings in Turkic could be listed chronologically according to certain phonetic criteria for the first time. My work from this period was presented at a scientific conference in Warsaw (Poland).
In the final stage of my project, I focused on the borrowings from historical Turkic languages to Mongolian. In the context of Kyrgyz-Mongolian language contacts, I have proven through various criteria, especially phonetics, that numerous lexemes passed from this language to Mongolian during the Yenisey Kyrgyz period. On the other hand, thanks to the project it turned out that the number of Mongolian loans in Kyrgyz is more than 3000. This shows that Kyrgyz has a special place in the context of Turkic-Mongolian language contacts. Kyrgyz speakers have been in very long and close contact with Mongolian-speaking tribes throughout history, so the Mongolian borrowings in Kyrgyz cannot have passed through a single Mongolian language. As a result of the research, I determined that there are four different Mongolian chronological layers in Kyrgyz. In this study, for the first time, decisive and concrete phonetic, morphological, semantic, and other criteria were used to identify Mongolian borrowings from the relevant periods. The results of the work from this period were included in four articles.
