Explore the vast range of titles available.

Turkic languages present particularly rich sources of data for the study of language contact, given the number and diversity of languages with which they have been in contact. Many common, false generalisations are laid bare and the methodology used in evaluating particular instances of language contact can also be used with profit by students of languages other than the Turkic.

In recent years we have witnessed conflicting proposals in the field of phonology with regard to descriptive and explanatory power of various theories. Especially significant is the controversy involving abstract versus concrete representations. This paper is an attempt to view the abstractness controversy in the light of examples from linguistic borrowing. Examining certain Arabic loans into Turkish it is shown that phonetic explanations are overridingly more credible than abstract accounts that rely on the theory of markedness.

In 1934 a scandal erupted in Anhialo/Anchialos, soon to be renamed Pomorie, in connection with a directive issued by the county police chief prohibiting the use of “foreign languages, especially Greek and Turkish, in all state, county, and public offices,” as well as “at the port, the [railway] station, workers’ storage facilities, coffeehouses, pubs, hotels, motels, factories, and on the streets.” Disseminating the decree through messengers and posting it on public buildings, the chief argued that speaking foreign languages “undermine[d] the national feeling of every Bulgarian . . . [and] g[ave] reasons to think that Anhialo and its district were