Relation of the Tati Varieties of Khalkhal with Taleshi Language

In this article, the researcher has examined the language varieties of Shahroud district in Khalkhal county in Ardebil province. The varieties are spoken in villages of Askestan, Shal, Derav, Kareen, kolour, Gilavan and Lerd, and locally are known as Tati. Also, he has compared these varieties, synchronically, with the three main dialects of Taleshi at phonological, morphological and syntactic levels. These villages are located to the west of Guilan, exactly beyond the Talesh Mountains. The survey is based on studying phonetic, morphological, syntactic, and lexical features of the language varieties in question. Data are obtained through library and fieldwork studies. Tati dialects, in spite of their similarities in vocabulary, are so diverse and scattered that cannot all be defined under a specific language group. Because of this, linguists have classified them differently, and in some cases, have added Taleshi dialects to them. The purpose of the article is to answer the question whether the language varieties spoken in Shahroud district of Khalkhal can be categorized as varieties of Taleshi, or are they independent varieties? Based on the data of this article, the language varieties of five villages out of seven villages in question, i.e. Askestan, Shal, Derav, Kolour, and Gilavan, can be placed with Southern Taleshi in the same category, but the language varieties of the two villages of Kerin and Lerd have differences with the varieties of the other five villages, and are different from the Southern Taleshi.
 
Extended Abstract
 1.Introduction
Taleshi is one of the North Western Iranian languages spoken mainly between two rivers of Koura in Azerbaijan Republic, and Sefidroud in Guilan province of Iran. Other rivers separate three main varieties of the language: Northern Taleshi between Koura and Navroud, Central variety between Navroud and Shafaroud, Southern variety between Shafaroud and Sefidroud. From a political geography point of view, Northern Taleshi, in addition to Azerbaijan, spreads in Iran till Karganroud of Talesh country; Central Taleshi involves parts of Asalem and Paresar, and Southern Taleshi involves parts of Fouman, Shaft, Rasht, Rezvanshahr, Masal, Shanderman, and Someasara.
    A large number of the dialects scattered in a vast geographical area are called Tati. Tati has been divided into two groups, as Caucasus and Iranian Tati. Forgetting about this categorization, there is high degree of diversity between different varieties of the language, in a way that sometimes there is little or no mutual intelligibility between their speakers. On the other hand, from the previous centuries, authors like Ibne Hawqal, al-Maqdisi, and Yaqut al-Hamawi have written about people and languages of Iran and namely Azerbaijan region of the country; and notwithstanding the fact that they have mentioned of Azariye, Fahlavi, and Persian in their works, non have referred to Tati. Most authors have used the word Tat to mean Iranian and non-Turk. There wasn't any trace of the word Tat in Azerbaijan at least till thirteenth century, even Hamdallah Mustawfi Qazvini, the historian and geographer of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries hasn't pointed to Tat in his book Nuzhat al-Qulub, although he has talked about some of the present villages of Shahroud.
    According to the above-mentioned views, the purpose of the survey is to compare, synchronically, the dialects of villages of Askestan, Shal, Derav, Kareen, Kolour, Guilevan, and Lerd of Shahroud district in Khalkhal county, with three dialects of Northern, Southern and Central dialects of Taleshi, based on field and library research, at phonological, morphological, and syntactic levels. Shahroud is located in Khalkhal county in Ardabil province, and includes three Dehestans of Shal, Palanga, and Shahroud. This district is neighbor to Guilan from the East, and Talysh Mountains have separated the region from Guilan.
    The fact that Taleshi and the language varieties of Shahroud are of the same origin is something known, but the degree of proximity of the language varieties of Shahroud villages to each other and to Taleshi dialects is something that needs more study. The purpose of this article is to find out whether we can categorize the languages of the seven villages with the three Taleshi dialects or not, or is it possible to categorize the language varieties of all of these villages in one group? Or shall we categorize them based on theie differences at various levels? How far are the language varieties of these villages from each other, and how close are to various dialects of Taleshi?
 
2.Theoretical framework
Comparative Linguistics examines similarities between languages. Here, the survey area includes phonetic, morphological and syntactic levels.  In comparative linguistics, researchers pay attention to descriptive studies of languages, and compare them with each other. In this article, the researcher has illustrated the above-mentioned characteristics of various Tati dialects of Shahroud, and then has compared them with Taleshi, and has discussed their similarities and differences.
 
3.Methodology
In the first part of the article, the researcher has provided the phones of Taleshi and Tati, and has illustrated that some phonetic features of Ancient and Middle Iranian languages are maintained in both of them. At morphological level, we have investigated nominative and non-nominative cases in singular and plural nouns, pronouns, case in adjectives, strong and weak forms of the root, subjunctives, infinitives, verbal prefixes, and syntactic form of the verbs with different tenses. Also, the ways to build derived words, and derivational prefixes of Taleshi and Tati of Shahroud have been investigated, and examples are provided for the affixes of the languages. At the syntactic level, we have considered the nominal group, order of the constituents, and functional markers. Then, we have studied the vocabularies of the two dialects, and have given a list of the Tati's words used in the varieties of Shahroud district that aren't used in Taleshi. Finally, we have examined the words according to their topic in the tables.
 
4.Results and Discussions
Based on examining the linguistic features, we have found out that dialects known as Tati in Shahroud district are in the same group with Taleshi Language. On the other hand, similarities of Southern Taleshi with the language varieties of Shahroud villages are more than the similarities of Southern Taleshi with Northern Taleshi. There are some differences phonetically but little. Some phonetic features of the Ancient and Middle Iranian languages are maintained in both Taleshi and Tati almost in similar ways.
    In the morphology, in both languages, nouns and pronouns have two cases of nominative and non-nominative, but adjectives have a single case form. There aren't any differences in the way of making present participle, past participle and relative adjectives. Verb roots have two strong and weak forms. Inflection is the same in Taleshi and Tati varieties in question. Pronouns are the same but have little differences at phonetic levels. Infinitive markers in the language varieties of the villages of Shahroud are not the same, but all of them are used in Taleshi too. In syntax, the way of making noun modifiers and adjective phrases are the same. The nouns in genitive case are in non-nominative form. Ergative structures have remained in both languages, but structures aren't the same for both of them. In this context, Lerd and Kerin villages are closer to Central Taleshi. The linguistic differences of these two villages with the other villages of Shahroud are more than the differences that exist between the language varieties of those villages and the Taleshi varieties. At the lexical level, those lexical items of the language varieties of Shahroud that are not found in Taleshi are Turkish, or loan-words from other language. Of course, the influence of Turkish on language varieties of Shahroud is much lower than the influence of the language on the North Taleshi. This has caused the language varieties of two villages of Kerin and Lerd to be more simillar to the North Taleshi, and be more different from the language varieties of other villages of Shahroud. Therefore, the most important causes for the lexical differences between the two languages are geographical factors and the borrowing from Turkish. However, at different levels, the difference between the language varieties of the villages of Shahroud, obviously, is less that the differences that exist between Central and South Taleshi and North Taleshi. Accordingly, the people of Shahroud can talk easily and have the best relationship with the Talysh. For trade, they could pass through the mountains of Talysh and come to Guilan through three ways of Masal, Asalem, and Masoule. In addition to language continuity, the people of the both sides of the mountains of Taleshian have cultural continuity too. According to our investigation at the three mentioned levels, we can categorize the language varieties of Eskestan, Derav, Shal, Kolour, and Guilvan with Southern Taleshi. And, we can categorize language varieties of Kerin and Lerd differently, because of some differences at phonetic level that make them more similar to North Taleshi, and because of differences at the syntax level, especially considering ergative structures, that make them more similar to Central Taleshi.  In addition, because of having grammatical gender, the language varieties of the two villages are separated from the language varieties of the other villages of Shahroud district.
 
5.Conclusions and suggestions
Based on the findings of this article, and in order to be able to have a more accurate idea about the relationship between the language varieties of Shahroud district in Khalkhal county and Taleshi language, we suggest that the other language varieties ​​of the villages of the district, and the language varieties of the villages of Khvoresh Rostam district, be compared with the three main varieties of Taleshi, based on fieldwork and library studies, at three phonological, morphological and syntactic levels.
 
Select Bibliography
Henning, W. B. The Old Language of Azerbaijan. Translated by B Sarkarati. Namehfarhangestan. 1995; 1(1): 51-72.
Minorsky, V. Tat. First Encyclopaedia of Islam. 1913-1936. M. Th. Houtsma, et al (eds.). Vol: VIII. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 1987; 699.
Rezayati Kishakhala M, Sabzalipuor J. Ergative Structure in Tati Khalkhal Dialect. Adab Pazhuhi. 2007; 1(1): 89-105.
Stilo, D.L. The Tati Language Group in the Sociolinguistic Context of Northwestern Iran and Transcaucasia. In Iranian Studies. 1981; 14(¾): 137-187.
Stilo, Donald L. The Caspian Region and South Azerbaijan: Caspian and Tatic. The Languages and Linguistics of Western Asia, An Areal Perspective. Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan (eds.). 2018; 659- 824.
Yarshater, A. The Dialect of Shahrood (Khalkhal). BSOAS. 1959; XXII 22: 52-68.
Yarshater, A. A Grammar of Southern Tati Dialects, The Hague Paris. 1969a.
Yarshater, A. The Use of Postpositions in Southern Tati. Yādnāme-ye Irāni–ye Minorsky. M. Minovi and I. Afshar (eds.). Tehran: Tehran University. 1969b; 221- 2.
Yarshater, A .1988. Azerbaijan. Available at: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/azerbaijan-vii.