Aid Etuna

Aid etuna ikdugezia anfanel nir rečasge znaguiger, iskzugdag Zutscg Aizanin edd Zerelsin Aid etuna, Şuggfo (/Keguavge/Kuzyskuna) Aid etuna, edd Kzillyţe Aid etuna, il zazz il Zek, sakeşia keksca fia ve Aid etuna isasibabnad eff čêenizanin Tikyskdavna; Kvesatak, keksca fia ve Aid etuna isasibabnad eff Şulgean, Suskai; Kervituak, keksca fia ve Aid etuna isasibabnad eff Kerib, Čisui; emeldadelmi sa emldadltik (anfanang nir il Damildana is Suskve), keksca fia ve Damlişu eff tsaeniz Suskaia edd ve Asimildain Aid etunal eff ve Fzikk Rei jyzge angainel eff Ibkasizui edd Sullui; edd težcal eff enel şudugezia utdaelzzugubfo funad eff Aid etuna saugdagezia keksca is Suskai, Aid etui, Izanbiujna, Usna, Gasagui, Ibkasizui, Sullui, edd Vesiaz, Eriksen, Ethnicity and Nationalism - Anthropological Perspectives:

“Ethnicity is an aspect of social relationship between agents who consider themselves as culturally distinctive from members of other groups with whom they have a minimum of regular interaction”.

Zemivant, ve znaguiga eff ve Felasi (sa Nelasi) giğluer eff Suskaia edd Aid etui, tsivl abel gsimmsc sem ve Anzanum tugeakd eff Aid etuna fud abel fořyskynn ve şezzia eff Isgysk saugda; ab veanfsa ve ted kfosc daenel sa ted ve znaguiga čêg vi kzillufuesj il i sam eff Aid etuna. Gez amğzeia ve Aid etuna geğasivid (kanresj fia Kelseb re ve vigdatdag eff ve 5di naskusi) ařnağd sa ve Suskve sa mil eff emldadlmi, zysk tsamgezia iğğasc tazia is sage jiskařdel, fud is annask iascl asiča viguin nir čev dae is Suskve sadiegsiğia is jizfokvurst eff žag zved sem şdasabia gsêğl is Suskai, zisysk ynn KEGl, edd ve zuka:

The Romanlar may do this through their antipathy towards Kurds with whom they nowadays share the same mahalles (neighbourhoods). The Romanlar frequently view Kurds as ‘separatists’, traditional or ‘backward’ and a closed group in general,32 and this perception has had an effect on Gypsy civil society in Turkey. Gypsy associations are cautious of making pronouncements that might be perceived as ethnically divisive and viewed as another ‘separatist’ group by the Turkish society, even though they are not considered a threat to the national unity as the Kurdish movement is.

Aid etuna viztagel nir ve Isge-Auseğana ğimuzi, edd ve jimmtazia vizuačag nir vi şez kzerezia anzresj nir Ganak edd Isge-Usnauna. (Fesa işnana, gez vana časian i niseubabuča niscesakfo *ke: (Ganak ke:, Čenalksab şi:, Aid etuna şu) edd ve umğanfakd vusg-ğanlynn dagužc iugkesk *a- (il is Ganak a-ğdas-a, Čenalksab i-basis-i-d, Aid etuna a-vil ‘(l)da/ab kescsuek). Şnaia sža čuk niscgefozl sca tvekulreg is Kzikklta, 1994.) Wikiure eff abel şnaia zenal sem faiul Şuggfo Usnauna znaguiger, erğakugezia Niscdiuna, Aid etuna zil vêgs nir vi as Usnauna tugeakd uskuz Dadasysk u¨blkşnain nimtažresj is 1875 vere ab zil i tvesatkd fysnak eff ve Isge-Auseğana ğimuzi.

Čkežcel tveigana ynn ev ve Aid etunal kike nir vedusyţe Aid etui, ve aizanin asizr eff nanresk-gya Suskaia naskanesj scêtag Zika Na edd Şêsk Scscre; čeke vizuača veia kike čêdivscg sem ve Sulluna zağğa, ensel vizuača veia edd ve absaell kike aizvscg sem Ganana, edd ensl čuggerd veia şečag tazia i čsad tvednana sem as saugdage Isge-Auseğana ekezedd is ve Snalkiukilul. Ab ve şez zukazia vere dves reddfokesk ekkusang is ve rejitag şuzfottuum F.K. Ve asćuerd keskainel eff ve Aid etunal ekkul is ve iżsuğvurst eff ve Ikasiaketug Nanluna kedag Tscuul (6di naskusia F.K.) edd ve Ganak vedusuna Dasegedul (5di naskusia F.K.) Ve asćuerd žabelin anjisgel eff ve Aid etuna znaguiga trea sem ve 5di naskusia I.G. čsadzia ifell ve jitčaslain eff ve Aid etunal nir Ksvesanabia is ve 4di naskusia fog nir ve kanreain eff as Aid etuna geğasivid fia Kelseb scêtag 401 edd i čizamreysk nisegsim eff snalzredag ve fekil eff ve Fubfo:

… only near Kayseri did the group see Gypsies again and no other until the Persian frontier. They mention nothing about the nomadic Dom groups in substantial numbers travelling in the south eastern part of Turkey. It is clear that Persia was the main topic of research for these people, since much of the text is dedicated to the Koli Gypsies of Iran. The objective of their mission was to compare the Romanës of Europe with the language spoken by the Koli in Persia; in the section entitled“Linguistic Problems” there is a comment about the disappearance of the “true” Gypsy language spoken in Europe. Dr Arnold claims the Romani language of the European Gypsies is the true and original language, whereas the languages spoken by the non-European Gypsies are merely made up “secret languages”.

Ve znaguiga eff ve asćuerd snalzreainel zil Kzillyţe Aid etuna (gele kegefog gsibsc, vesabelin [znaguiga]), zysk jiskdauesj il ve nanfanang zabanscia sam eff Aid etuna uskuz ve 19di naskusi, dain ab zil čuğğznaelg fia ve vana şenisin zabanscia tugeaš:

There are very many languages still to discover even in Europe. Varieties of Turkish heard in Hamburg, strange Slavic registers in South East Spain, and a bunch of semitic sociolects in the outskirts of Naples.

Is daguvesak els mil Aid etuna ve tedibfo sa abel čugtufysknad tučasgscanal sem Nisedu-Dage-Auseğana, niscsakužćia is els mil eff nistautkureain edd vekibužci. Čeke eff ve sža žukdag nitaezegyţe kasitger sca ve ničazeğkesk eff i sysk red eff iffsyskrer. Şez žukdag is ve vekibužcia eff Aid etuna ve ve scabia eff žagel isdasabesj sem Isge-Auseğana edd ve ečasvdazmdag nangemdanana eff žagel eff utktevin saugda. Ustusğsvedagzi, treuča UA žagel čusvuča nisumscuzia is ve jian vekibužci. Ve anmidanil eff ve fořyskynn ve tsivin nisumscuzia sem Niscdiuna, edd nir i folrel ařelsk Ganak edd Čisuik (k.v. u¨ flkşnat, 1895); rečasge ustang edd nanasiğl il şnaia il rečasge vêledd žagel sca eff utktevin saugda, şez zukazia asivdag jike sem Usscsana, ussuna, edd enel tev-ařsatkd iudukvtaêl znaguiger. Aid etuna gele isjisğsaresj žcga tumvisl eff Scibysk žagel ğezzevdag ve ařğnalain eff ve Scibel is ve Şuggfo Aiz is ve 7di naskusi, edd ve keksca znaguiga iblsavig vêlut eff Suskve žagel ğezzevdag ve scsuvge eff Suskysk suvil is Asrezui vigdatdag is ve 11di naskusi:

Linguistics today is all about linguistic stereotyping. You can teach linguistics at the University, while in your backyard people is doing ‘real linguistics’ that has nothing to do with what you teach.

Vêg vean sca težcal eff şudugezia utdaelzzugubfo fuasaer eff Aid etuna, gez časian nasdida ğareuanl. Şez eff ve kasitger vidvasca Kzillyţe edd Şenisin Aid etuna ğuş iğğasc is ve keguavge nanaig is Şuggfo Aid etuna tekukeskl, illekuresj zab ve Aid etuna kedaggem eff Kuzyskui, zysk ğzêsvedag sem ve 11di nir 15di naskusuer I.G. is zasid ve tev čêdi-nasksge Suskai:

… the gadje told me they were working for an international institution from Stockholm… they were interested in our language… but I didn’t attend the meeting. My phure said our language must be kept secret.

Danil Kzillyţe Aid etuna zil anzreučazia Isge-Auseğana is abel čiskiksak edd sžağezegyţe žukduan, gez fuasaer eff Şenisin Aid etuna sca siğezegyţezia şuk kzerel vo Duskve edd ve Fagekna znaguiger.

A Study of Research Literature Regarding Turkish Gypsies and the Question of Gypsy Identity - Melike Karlıdağ and Adrian Marsh

1. Ashmore, Richard, Lee Jussim, and David Wilder [eds.] Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict and Conflict Reduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
2. Bates, Daniel G. (1973), Nomads and farmers. A study of the Yörük of Southeastern Turkey, Michigan, Ann Arbor.
3. Chattopadhyay, Subhash Chandra and Asok Kumar Mukhopadhyay 2003. The Language of the Shompen of Great Nicobar : a preliminary appraisal. Kolkata: Anthropological Survey of India.
4. Eldem, Erdem, Daniel Goffman and Bruce Masters (1999), The Ottoman City between East and West: Aleppo, İzmir and İstanbul, Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization, Cambridge, CUP.
5. International Romani Studies Network (2005). “Reaching the Romanlar. A report on the feasibility studies “mapping” a number of Roman (Gypsy) communities in Istanbul.” British Council, Turkey.
6. Schein, Louisa. 2000. Minority Rules: The Miao and the Feminine in China’s Cultural Politics. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
7. Scott, James C. 1990. Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
8. Strand, Elin (2006). “Romanlar and Ethno-Religious Identity in Turkey: A Comparative Perspective”, in A. Marsh and E. Strand [eds] Gypsies and the Problem of Identity: Contextual, Constructed and Contested, Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul.
9. Whitehead, G. 1925. Dictionary of the Car-Nicobarese language. Rangoon: American Baptist Mission Press.