Formation patterns of clothing terminology in Turkic languages

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive linguistic and comparative analysis of the ways of formation of clothing names in Turkic languages, focusing on their structural, semantic, and ethnolinguistic characteristics. The study aims to identify the main word-formation mechanisms, semantic processes, and external influences that shape the lexicon of clothing and headwear across the Oghuz group of Turkic languages, including Azerbaijani, Turkish, Turkmen, and Gagauz. The relevance of the research lies in the growing interest in the interaction between language, culture, and material heritage, as well as in the insufficiently systematized description of clothing terminology within Turkic linguistics. The research is based on a corpus of lexical units extracted from explanatory dictionaries, historical sources, and contemporary language usage. A комплекс of methods is applied, including descriptive and classificatory analysis to identify structural types of clothing names, comparative analysis to reveal cross-linguistic similarities and differences, and semantic analysis to interpret processes such as metaphorization, metonymy, and semantic shift. In addition, elements of etymological and ethnolinguistic analysis are employed to trace the origins and cultural motivations of clothing terminology. The findings demonstrate that clothing names in Turkic languages are formed through several productive mechanisms. Morphological word formation, particularly suffixation, is identified as the most productive method, with affixes such as –lıq, –lı, –sız, –ça, –caq, and –ma actively contributing to the creation of new lexical units. Alongside derivation, syntactic formation through compound and multi-component structures plays a significant role, especially in terminological naming related to garment construction, material, and function. Semantic processes, including metaphorical and metonymic transfer, also contribute to lexical expansion, often linking clothing names to body parts, natural phenomena, or cultural symbols. The analysis further reveals that clothing terminology reflects deep connections with cultural, social, and environmental factors. Many names encode information about social status, profession, age, gender, and regional identity, while others are associated with traditional crafts, production techniques, and aesthetic features. The presence of both Common Turkic lexical elements and numerous borrowings from Arabic, Persian, Russian, and European languages demonstrates the dynamic and contact-driven nature of the clothing lexicon. These borrowings are shown to result from historical, socio-political, and cultural interactions rather than случайные linguistic processes. In conclusion the study establishes that the system of clothing names in Turkic languages is a complex and multifunctional lexical domain shaped by morphological productivity, semantic transformation, and cultural context. The results highlight the importance of clothing terminology as a reflection of ethnolinguistic identity and as a valuable source for historical-linguistic and lexicographic research. The findings may contribute to further studies in Turkology, cognitive linguistics, and linguistic anthropology, as well as to the development of specialized dictionaries and corpora of material culture vocabulary.