It is known that in recent history special manuals entitled “The Old Uzbek Script” have also been published,…

👉 The beginning

It is known that in recent history special manuals entitled “The Old Uzbek Script” have also been published, and they are still in use.

There is no doubt that researchers have had discussions about what to call the script based on Arabic orthography. Indeed, one can see that in various past periods this script and language have been called by many names, such as “the old Uzbek written literary language,” “Old Turkic,” “Old Uzbek,” “the classical stage of the Old Uzbek language,” “the Old Uzbek classical written literary language,” “Chagatai Turkic,” “classical Chagatai,” and so on.

Whatever the case, after the Hunnic-runic script, the script used side by side, in parallel with the Uyghur script, is in every situation united by the Arabic alphabet. Applying the word “old” to the language and script of the sources that arose on the basis of this unity is inappropriate.

Criticism is easy – what is the solution? In my opinion, we should give up “old” and use “mumtoz” (classical). Besides, “klassik” has also been used in some scholarly literature. We hardly ever use an expression like “old Uzbek literature,” similar to the term “Old Uzbek language.”

In this world, the existence and unity of a particular nation are defined by its national language and literature. They are like flesh and nail — one cannot separate one from the other. Calling one “old” and the other “classical” is not appropriate, in my opinion.

Since the term “Uzbek classical literature” is in active use today, I think it is appropriate in every respect to call them accordingly “the Uzbek classical script” and “the Uzbek classical language.”

Someone may object to this by quoting world-famous socioprotolinguists such as N. Erkilmann, A. Frezkayner or D. Sekretaya. In fact, in scholarship it is important to take into account changes of opinion, development and progress.

In my view, giving up “old” cannot really be regarded as progress. It is fitting to see it as self-awareness, as giving up self-belittlement and self-abasement.

To be honest, when I took a look, terms such as “Old” or “Ancient German language and alphabet,” “Ancient Russian” or “Old Russian language and alphabet” have found a place in scholarly usage. Adjectives such as “ancient,” “old” and “new” also exist in the classification of the world's languages and in the periodization of their history.

Many people know this argument. But the “old alphabet” belonging to a number of languages of that kind in the world – many of its letters in their old form are not in use today.

Unlike that reality, the alphabet we call “the old script” is still in practical use today by the population of some countries of the world, in particular by Uzbeks in Afghanistan and Arabia, and by Uyghurs.

This shows that the alphabet is not “old” but rather “sacred” and “classical.” The word “mumtoz” means “selected, set apart.” In the 20th century, the life of the classical script was brought to an end; the classical script was set apart from the new age.

And yet it is an undeniable truth that the very finest — the choicest, priceless works of Uzbek classical literature were written in this script.

And yet the centuries-old Uzbek classical literature is the product of the Uzbek classical script and the Uzbek classical language, and of a unique poetic thought.

By the way, someone who disagrees with this view may say, as usual, “Don't get carried away by emotions.” In fact, emotion is a priceless feeling. Problems find their solution through feeling, understanding, sensing and perceiving the truth.

The Jadids welcomed novelty, renewal, and fitting proposals and reflections.

Well then, what do you say – “old” or “classical”?

Bahodir NURMUHAMMAD

***

A note from Akrom Malik:

Inspired by the teacher's reflections, I felt the wish to rename our project called “Turkic Alphabet Studies” to “Classical Script Studies.” What do you say?

In the video attached to this text, Nargiza Khudoybergan, one of our 3rd-grade students, is reading the 5th story of Chapter 3 from the manuscript of the book “Turkiy Guliston” by Sayfi Saroyi (pp. 164–165).

The story, from the conduct of the ancestor Ardashir Babakan, is about the harm of eating more than a hundred dirhams' weight of food in a single day.

This is what reading a classical text in the classical script looks like!