Tweet
LIVING LANGUAGES AND THE POLITICIZATION OF KURDISH
Today's Zaman
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-281043-living-languages-and-the-politicization-of-kurdish-by-engin-gulbey*.html
May 22 2012
Turkey
It had been only four years since the transition to the Latin alphabet
in Turkey. It was a state of mobilization and transition; the people
were unable to adapt to the new alphabet and former scholars were
trying to learn Latin letters as though they were new students.
This revolution in the Turkish language inspired Jaladat Ali Bedirhan,
a Kurdish intellectual. In Damascus, where he was in exile because of
his family, he started a Kurdish magazine, named Hawar, on May 15,
1932. Jaladat Ali Bedirhan, grandson of Bedirhan PaÅ~_a, the head
of the district of Botan, published Hawar in both the Arabic and
Latin alphabets. This dual alphabet system was a stage for Bedirhan,
who thought that Kurdish should adapt the Latin alphabet. From its
24th issue onwards, Bedirhan decided to publish Hawar only using the
Latin alphabet. The alphabet change which was imposed by a top-down
revolution in the Turkish language was carried out silently via a
humble magazine in Kurdish.
It has been 80 years since this story. During this period, Kurdish
has been transformed from a prohibited language to a language whose
publication and use is being encouraged by the state. Had this change
in the state's approach and the transformation that this language
has gone through taken place 80 years ago, Kurdish would have become
a respected instrument and language among linguists; but would it
still have become a tool for a political separatist ideology?
Unfortunately, the Kurdish language has become part of political
and ideological polarizations. Relying on the inherent problems of
the Kurdish language and the right to use of native language, this
language has been made part of uprisings and of violent resistance.
This unfair treatment towards Kurdish is no different than the attempts
of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) to use children in street
demonstrations, knowing that the police will not take action against
them. Sadly, like symbols of childhood and motherhood, the Kurdish
language is being used to legitimize violence in Kurdish society. To
secure social and popular support, children and young people are
turned into militants and Kurdish into a language of separatism.
Issues leading to politicization of Kurdish language
There are some major issues that have led to the politicization of the
Kurdish language: the origin, alphabet, dialect and dictionary. Even
though these four areas are perceived as problems relevant to
literature and history at first sight, when such matters as ideology,
politics, security, conflict and freedoms are involved, the fervor
associated with the political discussions becomes more visible.
One of the discussions on the Kurdish language relates to its origin.
Even though it is argued that the Kurdish language is part of the
Indo-European linguistic family, in the subgroup of Indo-Iranian
languages, there is no generally accepted argument on this matter. For
instance, some argue that the Kurds were originally Pishdadians and
that therefore the Kurdish language is originally based on the Pahlawi
language which the Pishdadians used. Pahlawi was originally the Avestan
language, the language in the holy script of Zarathustra. And once
Avestan is referred to as the origin of Kurdish, and the Pishdadians
as the ancestors of the Kurds with Zoroastrianism as their initial
religion, the bases for building a nation are identified.
When building a nation and laying down the groundwork for separatist
views, in addition to imagining a history and future, it is also
essential to ensure that the members of that nation believe that
they belong to a culture and a civilization that is distinct from
other cultures and civilizations. The association of the Kurds with
the Turks, Arabs or any other race poses a problem for those who
imagine a separate nation. At this point, the approach suggesting
that Avestan or the Pishdadian language is the origin of Kurdish is a
great opportunity for the politicization of language. It should also
be noted that supporters of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and the
KCK subscribe to this idea and base their policies on this assumption.
The second problem with the Kurdish language is relevant to the
alphabet, which also concerns the current discussions. Some refer to
nine different alphabets that the Kurds have used; the most common
of those today are Latin, Arabic and Cyrillic. The Kurds live in
four different countries plus small communities of Kurds in former
Soviet republics. For this reason, the Kurds are unable to properly
communicate in the written language. For instance, the popular dialect
in northern Iraq is based on the Arabic alphabet. The dialect used in
the Turkish lands is based on the Latin alphabet. The Kurds in Armenia
were allowed to use an alphabet other than Cyrillic in August 2010. To
address the difference between the alphabets, the Democratic Society
Congress (DTK) sponsored a meeting in Diyarbakır in March 2012. The
purpose of this meeting was to reach an agreement on a common alphabet
and to ensure unity among the Kurds in different locations. At this
point, an agreement on the Bedirhani alphabet, which could be referred
to as the Kurdish alphabet in Turkey, could make constructive and
positive contributions towards unification among Kurds.
It is meaningful that the Bedirhani alphabet is the alphabet of
the Kurds in Turkey; the PKK/KCK, which is uncomfortable with this
alphabet, argues that it is inadequate and that five more letters
should be included. With this move, they actually want to get rid of
the influence of Turkish on the alphabet and make it controllable by
the PKK. Turkey's concerns about the alphabet are focused on three
letters. In fact, the difference is on five letters rather than three.
There is no g in the Kurdish alphabet; and the Turkish alphabet does
not have Ä", q, x and w. And if the three letters that Turkey refuses
to accept (x, w, q) are left out, the remaining is the Latin alphabet
used in the Turkish language; in the frequently used Latin alphabet,
the letters x, w and q are used. The approach taken in which these
three letters are rejected creates an image of the cult hypothesis
that the Kurds are actually Turks. In reality, the fact that Kurdish
is spoken perfectly well with the addition of the three letters to
the Turkish alphabet is an indication that the Turks and Kurds have
similar sounds and emotions even if their languages are part of
different linguistic families.
Disputes over dialects
Thirdly, the current discussion on the different Kurdish dialects
should be addressed. The existence of different dialects in the
Kurdish language is not a problem; it is in fact a sign of diversity.
Kurmanji, Sorani, Gorani and Lorani are the main dialects of the
Kurdish language. It is also possible to extend the list; but what
matters is the survival of the dialects. It is known that Kurmanji
is the most frequently used dialect. The development and survival of
Kurmanji, which could also be referred to as Kurdish in Turkey, is
essential for the use of Kurdish, an indispensible right of Kurdish
citizens in Turkey. The problem with a dialect is the attempt to make
one specific dialect dominant over others. Zaza, which is argued
to be a Kurdish dialect, is the obvious victim of the politics of
imposition. Those who would like to see the Zaza people on their
side in the Kurdish issue argue that the Zaza language is a Kurdish
dialect and that the Zaza people are actually Kurdish. By this, they
actually rely on political pragmatism. This policy of imposition
would culminate in the disappearance of the Zaza language.
Fourthly, the issue of a dictionary should be discussed. In a country
of multiple languages, the actual source of the languages other than
the official one is a dictionary. A dictionary is the reflection of
the attempt by the Turkish people to communicate with the Kurdish
people. Without a dictionary, you cannot understand the Kurds, the
Zazas, the Circassians and the Georgians. At a time when people are
trying to understand each other in the world, it is a shame that the
state has not yet sponsored a dictionary of a language that many people
speak in this country. The void is being filled by ideology-based
dictionaries which make the language a tool of separation and
division. Those who conclude that the Islamic faith among the Kurds
is the real reason for their rejection of separatist views and the
main source of politicization of these four issues believe that the
Kurdish language would become independent if the Islamic notions and
structures were removed from the language. The structures and entities
that destroy all opposing and critical voices to become the one single
representative of the Kurds pursue the same policy for hegemony in the
language as well. The current goal is to build a Kurdish nation through
a language as the outcome of a new religion that was visibly detached
from Islam under the hegemony of the Avestan and Pishdadian languages.
In the final analysis, despite all attempts to politicize the
cultural minority rights in the Kurdish issue, the actual matters
should be addressed regardless of violence and politics. The cultural
minority rights include the attempt to promote and sustain Kurdish
and other languages. The best response to those who claim to be
the true representatives of the Kurds would be the realization and
implementation of new and constructive policies to ensure the use
and survival of the Kurdish language.
*Engin Gulbey is a researcher with the Ankara Strategy Institute.
Today's Zaman
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-281043-living-languages-and-the-politicization-of-kurdish-by-engin-gulbey*.html
May 22 2012
Turkey
It had been only four years since the transition to the Latin alphabet
in Turkey. It was a state of mobilization and transition; the people
were unable to adapt to the new alphabet and former scholars were
trying to learn Latin letters as though they were new students.
This revolution in the Turkish language inspired Jaladat Ali Bedirhan,
a Kurdish intellectual. In Damascus, where he was in exile because of
his family, he started a Kurdish magazine, named Hawar, on May 15,
1932. Jaladat Ali Bedirhan, grandson of Bedirhan PaÅ~_a, the head
of the district of Botan, published Hawar in both the Arabic and
Latin alphabets. This dual alphabet system was a stage for Bedirhan,
who thought that Kurdish should adapt the Latin alphabet. From its
24th issue onwards, Bedirhan decided to publish Hawar only using the
Latin alphabet. The alphabet change which was imposed by a top-down
revolution in the Turkish language was carried out silently via a
humble magazine in Kurdish.
It has been 80 years since this story. During this period, Kurdish
has been transformed from a prohibited language to a language whose
publication and use is being encouraged by the state. Had this change
in the state's approach and the transformation that this language
has gone through taken place 80 years ago, Kurdish would have become
a respected instrument and language among linguists; but would it
still have become a tool for a political separatist ideology?
Unfortunately, the Kurdish language has become part of political
and ideological polarizations. Relying on the inherent problems of
the Kurdish language and the right to use of native language, this
language has been made part of uprisings and of violent resistance.
This unfair treatment towards Kurdish is no different than the attempts
of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) to use children in street
demonstrations, knowing that the police will not take action against
them. Sadly, like symbols of childhood and motherhood, the Kurdish
language is being used to legitimize violence in Kurdish society. To
secure social and popular support, children and young people are
turned into militants and Kurdish into a language of separatism.
Issues leading to politicization of Kurdish language
There are some major issues that have led to the politicization of the
Kurdish language: the origin, alphabet, dialect and dictionary. Even
though these four areas are perceived as problems relevant to
literature and history at first sight, when such matters as ideology,
politics, security, conflict and freedoms are involved, the fervor
associated with the political discussions becomes more visible.
One of the discussions on the Kurdish language relates to its origin.
Even though it is argued that the Kurdish language is part of the
Indo-European linguistic family, in the subgroup of Indo-Iranian
languages, there is no generally accepted argument on this matter. For
instance, some argue that the Kurds were originally Pishdadians and
that therefore the Kurdish language is originally based on the Pahlawi
language which the Pishdadians used. Pahlawi was originally the Avestan
language, the language in the holy script of Zarathustra. And once
Avestan is referred to as the origin of Kurdish, and the Pishdadians
as the ancestors of the Kurds with Zoroastrianism as their initial
religion, the bases for building a nation are identified.
When building a nation and laying down the groundwork for separatist
views, in addition to imagining a history and future, it is also
essential to ensure that the members of that nation believe that
they belong to a culture and a civilization that is distinct from
other cultures and civilizations. The association of the Kurds with
the Turks, Arabs or any other race poses a problem for those who
imagine a separate nation. At this point, the approach suggesting
that Avestan or the Pishdadian language is the origin of Kurdish is a
great opportunity for the politicization of language. It should also
be noted that supporters of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and the
KCK subscribe to this idea and base their policies on this assumption.
The second problem with the Kurdish language is relevant to the
alphabet, which also concerns the current discussions. Some refer to
nine different alphabets that the Kurds have used; the most common
of those today are Latin, Arabic and Cyrillic. The Kurds live in
four different countries plus small communities of Kurds in former
Soviet republics. For this reason, the Kurds are unable to properly
communicate in the written language. For instance, the popular dialect
in northern Iraq is based on the Arabic alphabet. The dialect used in
the Turkish lands is based on the Latin alphabet. The Kurds in Armenia
were allowed to use an alphabet other than Cyrillic in August 2010. To
address the difference between the alphabets, the Democratic Society
Congress (DTK) sponsored a meeting in Diyarbakır in March 2012. The
purpose of this meeting was to reach an agreement on a common alphabet
and to ensure unity among the Kurds in different locations. At this
point, an agreement on the Bedirhani alphabet, which could be referred
to as the Kurdish alphabet in Turkey, could make constructive and
positive contributions towards unification among Kurds.
It is meaningful that the Bedirhani alphabet is the alphabet of
the Kurds in Turkey; the PKK/KCK, which is uncomfortable with this
alphabet, argues that it is inadequate and that five more letters
should be included. With this move, they actually want to get rid of
the influence of Turkish on the alphabet and make it controllable by
the PKK. Turkey's concerns about the alphabet are focused on three
letters. In fact, the difference is on five letters rather than three.
There is no g in the Kurdish alphabet; and the Turkish alphabet does
not have Ä", q, x and w. And if the three letters that Turkey refuses
to accept (x, w, q) are left out, the remaining is the Latin alphabet
used in the Turkish language; in the frequently used Latin alphabet,
the letters x, w and q are used. The approach taken in which these
three letters are rejected creates an image of the cult hypothesis
that the Kurds are actually Turks. In reality, the fact that Kurdish
is spoken perfectly well with the addition of the three letters to
the Turkish alphabet is an indication that the Turks and Kurds have
similar sounds and emotions even if their languages are part of
different linguistic families.
Disputes over dialects
Thirdly, the current discussion on the different Kurdish dialects
should be addressed. The existence of different dialects in the
Kurdish language is not a problem; it is in fact a sign of diversity.
Kurmanji, Sorani, Gorani and Lorani are the main dialects of the
Kurdish language. It is also possible to extend the list; but what
matters is the survival of the dialects. It is known that Kurmanji
is the most frequently used dialect. The development and survival of
Kurmanji, which could also be referred to as Kurdish in Turkey, is
essential for the use of Kurdish, an indispensible right of Kurdish
citizens in Turkey. The problem with a dialect is the attempt to make
one specific dialect dominant over others. Zaza, which is argued
to be a Kurdish dialect, is the obvious victim of the politics of
imposition. Those who would like to see the Zaza people on their
side in the Kurdish issue argue that the Zaza language is a Kurdish
dialect and that the Zaza people are actually Kurdish. By this, they
actually rely on political pragmatism. This policy of imposition
would culminate in the disappearance of the Zaza language.
Fourthly, the issue of a dictionary should be discussed. In a country
of multiple languages, the actual source of the languages other than
the official one is a dictionary. A dictionary is the reflection of
the attempt by the Turkish people to communicate with the Kurdish
people. Without a dictionary, you cannot understand the Kurds, the
Zazas, the Circassians and the Georgians. At a time when people are
trying to understand each other in the world, it is a shame that the
state has not yet sponsored a dictionary of a language that many people
speak in this country. The void is being filled by ideology-based
dictionaries which make the language a tool of separation and
division. Those who conclude that the Islamic faith among the Kurds
is the real reason for their rejection of separatist views and the
main source of politicization of these four issues believe that the
Kurdish language would become independent if the Islamic notions and
structures were removed from the language. The structures and entities
that destroy all opposing and critical voices to become the one single
representative of the Kurds pursue the same policy for hegemony in the
language as well. The current goal is to build a Kurdish nation through
a language as the outcome of a new religion that was visibly detached
from Islam under the hegemony of the Avestan and Pishdadian languages.
In the final analysis, despite all attempts to politicize the
cultural minority rights in the Kurdish issue, the actual matters
should be addressed regardless of violence and politics. The cultural
minority rights include the attempt to promote and sustain Kurdish
and other languages. The best response to those who claim to be
the true representatives of the Kurds would be the realization and
implementation of new and constructive policies to ensure the use
and survival of the Kurdish language.
*Engin Gulbey is a researcher with the Ankara Strategy Institute.