Kazakh (Қазақ тілі)

[Osprey]

As best as I can tell, most Kazakh letters are similar to their Russian equivalents. The main differences are the 'extra' letters that are used to Kazakh. (That's not to say that Kazakh is pronounced as Russian, but the letters used to write both are for the most part pronounced the same)

Pronunciation is a bit complicated… especially stresses, and sibilants.

Also, I'm curious, what are you using to learn Kazakh?

I started with Kazakh Language Course for Peace Corps; it has already given me a good kick in getting along with Kazakh. Meanwhile I look for a wider course. It seems to me that English-Kazakh-textbooks and courses are quite expensive. Perhaps I must turn to Russian-Kazakh-ones. Recommendations are very welcome!

Btw, in my acquaintance are two persons who were born in Kazakhstan (and look like Kazakhs), but they can’t speak Kazakh, only Russian. How strange!

[księżycowy]

Pronunciation is a bit complicated… especially stresses, and sibilants.

Yes, sorry, didn't mean to imply that pronunciation was easy. Though I don't really know all the pronunciation rules and such as what I'm learning with doesn't really go over much with regard to pronunciation (but it does have audio!).

I started with Kazakh Language Course for Peace Corps; it has already given me a good kick in getting along with Kazakh. Meanwhile I look for a wider course. It seems to me that English-Kazakh-textbooks and courses are quite expensive. Perhaps I must turn to Russian-Kazakh-ones. Recommendations are very welcome!

Yes, the Peace Corps text is very good for getting a taste of Kazakh, it is one of the few textbooks in English that is good with the grammar. I'm using 'Kazakh Made Easy' myself as my main textbook, it is really good as it has audio (as I referenced above), and also seems to go into a great deal of grammar and vocabulary. Though some of the grammar explanations (especially in the beginning) are a little lacking so I'm using the one you are, and also another book called 'Learn Kazakh in 70 Steps' to supplement the grammar explanations.

It is really hard to find many (if any) textbooks in English, and good ones at that.

Btw, in my acquaintance are two persons who were born in Kazakhstan (and look like Kazakhs), but they can’t speak Kazakh, only Russian. How strange!

Interesting. Though I suppose it's possible. Strange indeed!

[zhiguli]

Btw, in my acquaintance are two persons who were born in Kazakhstan (and look like Kazakhs), but they can’t speak Kazakh, only Russian. How strange!

It's actually very common in big cities all over the former USSR for the titular ethnic group to speak only Russian, go to Russian school and study their "native" language as a foreign language for a few hours a week. Russian was the prestige language and "national" languages were seen as an impediment to career advancement and the like.

[księżycowy]

It's actually very common in big cities all over the former USSR for the titular ethnic group to speak only Russian, go to Russian school and study their "native" language as a foreign language for a few hours a week. Russian was the prestige language and "national" languages were seen as an impediment to career advancement and the like.

I had thought that was a possibility. Seeing as Russian is seen as an international language and such in the former USSR. Russian is still a very important language in the region if I am not mistaken. Though I wouldn't be surprised if English is starting to gain some ground.

[Osprey]

It's actually very common in big cities all over the former USSR for the titular ethnic group to speak only Russian, go to Russian school and study their "native" language as a foreign language for a few hours a week. Russian was the prestige language and "national" languages were seen as an impediment to career advancement and the like.

Yes, it is easy to believe. It is quite normal behavior for conquerors - all over the world - to destroy native languages.

Though I wouldn't be surprised if English is starting to gain some ground.

Same thoughts here - bad English seeps in everywhere.

Kazakh seems to be beautiful language; I'm already - after 3 weeks’ study - very fond of it... the most guttural voices make throat ache, though… But for me the most difficult vowels to differ from each other’s are: ы, і, и, й... I mean, when I try to read aloud the Kazakh texts.

[księżycowy]

Kazakh seems to be beautiful language; I'm already - after 3 weeks’ study - very fond of it... the most guttural voices make throat ache, though… But for me the most difficult vowels to differ from each other’s are: ы, і, и, й... I mean, when I try to read aloud the Kazakh texts.

Yes, the guttural languages are the best! (Of course this is being said by someone who hopes to learn Georgian, which has an unfathomable amount of consonants.)

The vowel thing is kind of funny, I also have some problems differentiating some of the vowels as well. Thankfully my study of Mongolian does help with some of the pronunciation and grammar. But as the two languages are not very similar it doesn't help a ton.

[zhiguli]

It's actually very common in big cities all over the former USSR for the titular ethnic group to speak only Russian, go to Russian school and study their "native" language as a foreign language for a few hours a week. Russian was the prestige language and "national" languages were seen as an impediment to career advancement and the like.

Yes, it is easy to believe. It is quite normal behavior for conquerors - all over the world - to destroy native languages.

It wasn't so black and white as that in the USSR, though (certainly not like here in North America where children were literally ripped out of the arms of their parents and sent to boarding schools, where they would be beaten for speaking their native language). National languages were given full state support, alphabets were invented for previously unwritten languages, there were newspapers, books, TV/radio, etc etc.
The other side of it was that Russian was promoted as the language to learn if you wanted to succeed beyond your village or republic. And so many parents, who had the choice of sending their children to study in the native language, made the conscious decision to send their children to Russian school and even start speaking Russian at home.

Though I wouldn't be surprised if English is starting to gain some ground.

As a foreign language, yes. But I don't think many parents are raising their children to speak English.

[księżycowy]

It wasn't so black and white as that in the USSR, though (certainly not like here in North America where children were literally ripped out of the arms of their parents and sent to boarding schools, where they would be beaten for speaking their native language).

To get off topic for a second, it was pretty messed up what the early American's did to the Native Americans (culturally and linguistically). Whole cultures were essentially wiped out, and mostly because they were seen as 'lesser people' and/or because of land. How ignorant they were then. [And this is being said by an American with no Native blood in him!]

Anyway, back on topic . . .

National languages were given full state support, alphabets were invented for previously unwritten languages, there were newspapers, books, TV/radio, etc etc.The other side of it was that Russian was promoted as the language to learn if you wanted to succeed beyond your village or republic. And so many parents, who had the choice of sending their children to study in the native language, made the conscious decision to send their children to Russian school and even start speaking Russian at home.

That was one of the 'good' things about Communism. It did provide a good education system in which the native peoples of the USSR could become literate in their native tongue and also have opportunities that they may have not had otherwise. This is merely speculation, but I would think that if the Soviet Union had never taken control of Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Mongolia, most of those people would be illiterate in their native language. [Though Armenian and Georgian had alphabets before the Russian take over, so not sure about them.]

It would be interesting to know (if possible . . .) the literacy rates before the Russian take over of Central Asia, due to the fact, I believe that most of those languages used one form of another of the Arabic alphabet at that time. I would venture to guess that literacy would have been poor. Afghanistan is a perfect example (up until recently I would guess) for they still use an Arabic based writing system and for the longest time most people were illiterate in that country. Not sure of their current status on literacy in Afghanistan, but I would guess it might be improving in areas.

As a foreign language, yes. But I don't think many parents are raising their children to speak English.

That's essentially what I meant. Wasn't trying to imply that Kazakh's (or any other former USSR peoples) are raising their children in English. That would make no sense. English has no history in the area. Only recently has English begun to be seen as an international language there.

[zhiguli]

This is merely speculation, but I would think that if the Soviet Union had never taken control of Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Mongolia, most of those people would be illiterate in their native language. [Though Armenian and Georgian had alphabets before the Russian take over, so not sure about them.]

Which starts to sound suspiciously like white man's burden...

[Though Armenian and Georgian had alphabets before the Russian take over, so not sure about them.]

Or the Latvians or Lithuanians. The script reforms mainly affected Muslim peoples whose languages were written in Arabic script. The shadow side of this was a mass effort to eradicate the pre-Soviet literary heritage of these peoples, book burnings and the like.

It would be interesting to know (if possible . . .) the literacy rates before the Russian take over of Central Asia, due to the fact, I believe that most of those languages used one form of another of the Arabic alphabet at that time. I would venture to guess that literacy would have been poor.

Arabic script had nothing to do with it. These were feudal societies where literacy was the privilege of a small elite.

Afghanistan is a perfect example (up until recently I would guess) for they still use an Arabic based writing system and for the longest time most people were illiterate in that country. Not sure of their current status on literacy in Afghanistan, but I would guess it might be improving in areas.

Afghanistan is a perfect example of how 30 years of chronic warfare and the mass emigration of the most educated people can bring a country back to the stone age.
Again, it's not a matter of writing system but wealth and educational standards.
Iran uses the same script and has a much higher literacy rate, while Turkey uses a phonetic Latin alphabet and its literacy rate is not much higher than that of Iran.
And I don't need to bring up Japan, which would be the most illiterate country in the world if it were merely a matter of script.

[księżycowy]

Arabic script had nothing to do with it. These were feudal societies where literacy was the privilege of a small elite.

I wasn't saying the script itself impacts literacy, both Persian and Arabic have a wide assortment of literature, and have great literacy rates. I think it has to do with culture and education systems then anything else. (And I suppose economics as well, can't fund the economic system on dreams after all)

Afghanistan is a perfect example of how 30 years of chronic warfare and the mass emigration of the most educated people can bring a country back to the stone age.
Again, it's not a matter of writing system but wealth and educational standards.

Couldn't agree more


Sorry if I seemed to imply it was the script that I was targeting. I think that it was more or less the culture of the peoples that impacted it the most (as well as the education system). Hence my example of Afghanistan. Even during the Taliban's control over the country education was poor at best, and women getting educated was unheard of. The culture of Afghanistan impacted the rate of literacy.

In short, I completely agree with your comments.

As far as 'white man's burden,' I am not saying that these peoples were better off being conquered by the Soviets. It goes back to the literacy 'debate,' it was just a way (perhaps an awkward way) to say that due to the education system (and the high esteem the Soviets seemed to place on education) most of the peoples gained literacy sooner then they might have if they had not been taken over. Looking at most of nomadic, and feudal societies from a historic view, one would see that literacy does not come quickly.

If these peoples were to have stayed free of Soviet control they might have been just recently getting literacy, or still not getting it on a grand scale. But I can say neither option is better or worse then the other. [Nor will I] Again it's more to due with education, culture and the like. It is fair to say that the Soviets implanted a 'new' culture (a more 'western' culture), new education system and such in/for the peoples they controlled.

I would be just as happy learning Kazakh written in Arabic script!

[eskandar]

I think that it was more or less the culture of the peoples that impacted it the most (as well as the education system). Hence my example of Afghanistan. Even during the Taliban's control over the country education was poor at best, and women getting educated was unheard of. The culture of Afghanistan impacted the rate of literacy.

The Taliban is not a good representative of the culture of Afghanistan, as evidenced by the fact that the majority of the country opposed their rule. Your statement "Even during the Taliban's control over the country education was poor at best" (my emphasis) is backwards: it is precisely because the Taliban did not value education overall, and banned education for women, that Afghanistan's literacy rate is so low. It may indeed have been higher prior to the Soviet invasion. The culture of the country has so little to do with the rate of literacy, especially compared with more relevant factors such as money, political stability, war/occupation, etc. Afghanistan's literacy rate is about 28%. The countries that it is closest to culturally have much higher literacy rates: Tajikistan 99.6%, Iran 82.4%, even Pakistan (which has its own problems of economic underdevelopment, instability, and war) has a much higher literacy rate at 49.9%.

As far as 'white man's burden,' I am not saying that these peoples were better off being conquered by the Soviets. It goes back to the literacy 'debate,' it was just a way (perhaps an awkward way) to say that due to the education system (and the high esteem the Soviets seemed to place on education) most of the peoples gained literacy sooner then they might have if they had not been taken over. Looking at most of nomadic, and feudal societies from a historic view, one would see that literacy does not come quickly.

If these peoples were to have stayed free of Soviet control they might have been just recently getting literacy, or still not getting it on a grand scale.

It's impossible to say. Perhaps if some countries had developed national literacy programs on their own terms, free from foreign occupation, they would have achieved even greater rates of literacy, possibly even in less time. Or maybe not. In any case, I feel quite certain that if Afghanistan had continued developing at the rate it was prior to the Soviet invasion in 1979, and had not suffered 30+ years of war and occupation, its literacy rate would be much, much higher than it is today.

[księżycowy]

The Taliban is not a good representative of the culture of Afghanistan, as evidenced by the fact that the majority of the country opposed their rule. Your statement "Even during the Taliban's control over the country education was poor at best" (my emphasis) is backwards: it is precisely because the Taliban did not value education overall, and banned education for women, that Afghanistan's literacy rate is so low. It may indeed have been higher prior to the Soviet invasion. The culture of the country has so little to do with the rate of literacy, especially compared with more relevant factors such as money, political stability, war/occupation, etc. Afghanistan's literacy rate is about 28%. The countries that it is closest to culturally have much higher literacy rates: Tajikistan 99.6%, Iran 82.4%, even Pakistan (which has its own problems of economic underdevelopment, instability, and war) has a much higher literacy rate at 49.9%.

I bow to you knowledge. Though I did not mean to say that the Taliban's culture was the undisputed culture of the whole of Afghanistan, but they were in power. Though I would point out that (at least to some degree) money, war, political stability and the like help shape culture, and are influenced by culture.

It's impossible to say. Perhaps if some countries had developed national literacy programs on their own terms, free from foreign occupation, they would have achieved even greater rates of literacy, possibly even in less time. Or maybe not. In any case, I feel quite certain that if Afghanistan had continued developing at the rate it was prior to the Soviet invasion in 1979, and had not suffered 30+ years of war and occupation, its literacy rate would be much, much higher than it is today.

Indeed, it is impossible to say with any definitiveness. It would be pure speculation on anyone's part. But fascinating none the less (to me anyway).

[Rakhimzhan]

viewtopic.php?f=99&t=13973&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=90
Hey, everybody!

It's a pleasure for me to find the people learning my native lannguage and interested in the Qazaq culture, country, traditions and other valuables, not less would be the greatest pleasure for me to find out any "қазақ бауырым", "қазақ жерлесім" here on the forum.

Actually, I could not help myself to be patient enough to read out the entire message stock of this forum till the end, only few messages... But what inspires me to take part in 'KZ racing' here, is that its a good opportunity for all of you to master out your Qazaq, from the one part, and for me - to master deeper my English while speaking with you, from the other part. I hope that would be a good language trading between us;))

If you need any help in Qazaq feel free and do not hezitate to ask whatever you want to know. I must add, I have one language and translation associated higher education, and will be glad to render my language assistance, although I have not been practicing any Qazaq-English translations and any language related studies/works for a long time, and almost forgot that crappy stuff I've learned in University... I would also appreciate your assistance and any guidance as a native speakers of English

P.S. I bet my sorries and appologies for any mistakes in my English.
Till then...

[księżycowy]

Awesome! We've got a native Kazakh speaker! Welcome Rakhimzhan!

Unfortunately I've had to put my Kazakh (or Qazaq if you prefer) studies on hold, but I do plan on getting back around to studying it soon. In the mean time enjoy it here at Unilang!

[I'm sure the others might benefit from you ]

[Osprey]

You are very welcome, Rakhimzhan! I, too, am all thrilled to see, that here is now true kazakh-speaking person! I started to study Kazakh a couple of months ago, and every day I fall into deeper love with it. Such a beautiful language and opens a very interesting culture!

[Rakhimzhan]

Сәлем достар! It's me again))
Starting my declarative greetings with қазақ "сәлем" I would also point out, to the issue, that the correct interrogative greetings standing for Eng "How are you?", "How do you do?", etc, in Qz are as follows:

Сәлемет -сіз/ -сің бе? [Sae lye 'myet si:z bye?]
Yet the same:
Саламат -сыз/ -сың ба? [Su: lu: 'mut si:z bu:?]

I guess my transcription is correct, the "u" is for long wide open 'a' as in Eng word "Bus". The 'ae' as the word "can", the "a" sound is very soft. You can find em all in the phoenetics literature. I showed them to highlight the vowel harmony effect - even if the entre structure of the words seems unaffected, but only a few vowels have been changed as in words "сӘлЕм" and "сАлАм" they are followed by the corresponding front / back vowels: "cӘлЕмЕтсІз бЕ?", "сАлАмАтсЫз бА?"!

The word "Саламат" stands for the "well-being", "health", and given that it is a bookish word (some linguists derive it from Arabic) it's single usage in ordinary colloquial speech is a rare phenomenon and actually is encountered mostly in the said greeting froms. Yet, of course, it doesn't mean that terms Salemet and Salamat could not be used in informal speech singly 'as is'.

Basically, the term "health" has its literary, formal and official form - "Денсаулық". And it can also be used in greetings. It is a universal word existing in all speech styles:

"Денсаулығ-ың/ -ыз қалай?" - How is your/Your health (direct and Polite from)? How are you, What's up?

ың/ -ыңыз, -ің/ -іңіз are personal endings for second person's simple (direct) and polite forms.

Here are another greeting forms:

Қал -ың/-ыңыз қалай?
Жағдай қалай? Жағдайың қалай, жағдайыңыз қалай?
Бала-шаға -ң/ -ңыз қалай?
Мал-шағаң -ң/ -ңыз қалай?
Сәлем!
Қалай -сың/ сыз?
Аман -сың/ -сыз ба?
Аманбы -сың/ -сыз?
Жақсымы -сың/ -сыз?
Үй іші аман ба?

Of course the list is not complete, I have recollected only those that popped up in my mind first))
As the play progresses, I will put another forms...

[Rakhimzhan]

Actually apart from that Ive saide about the greetings I would add one more info on the endings. It is dedicated to those who is not familiar with the peculiarities of personal and posessive endings in Qz (Kz)m yet will be also usefull to those who are

In Qz we name them "Жіктік жалғау" and "Тәуелдік жалғау" and divide them as follows:

Жіктік жалғаулар (Personal Endings):
Жекеше түрі (Single Form):

1. Бірінші жақ (First Person): -мын, -мін, -бын, -бін, -пын, -пін
2. Екінші жақ (Second Person):
Анайы түрі (Direct Form): -сың, -сің
Сыпайы түрі (Polite Form): -сыз, -сіз
3. Үшінші жақ (Third Person): жалғаулары жоқ (No Endings)


Көпше түрі (Plural Form):

1. Бірінші жақ (First Person): -мыз, -міз, -быз, -біз, -пыз, -піз
сирек жалғаулары (rare plural forms): -мыздар, -міздер, -быздар, -біздер, -пыздар, -піздер
2. Екінші жақ (Second Person):
Анайы түрі (Direct Form): -сыңдар, -сіңдер
Сыпайы түрі (Polite Form): -сыздар, -сіздер
3. Үшінші жақ (Third Person): -дар, -дер, -тар, -тер, лар, -лер
немесе жалғаусыз (or without endings)

Note: The Qz endings are close to that of English forms of auxiliary verb - to be (am, are, is, was, were - You are bastard!), which are at the same times copulas in the sentence (honey is sweet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Мысалы (For Example):

Жекеше түрі (Single Form):

1. Мен: Рахымжан-мын, әдемі-мін, қарыз-бын, cеміз-бін, арық-пын, неміс-пін
I am: Rahimzhan, beautiful, I owe a debt, fat, thin, Dutchman
2. Сен/Сіз (You are):
Сен - Анайы түрі: адам-сың, есек-сің
(Direct Form): a human, a donkey )))
Сіз - Сыпайы түрі: адам-сыз, есек-сіз
(Polite Form): a man, a donkey )))
3. Ол (He/She): топас, жақсы, (жалғаулары жоқ)
stupidm good

Note: In linguistics there is a division between lexical and grammatical categories of gender.
E.g. Indo-European languages and in the Romance group languages such as Spanish there are both of grammatical (bonita, muchisimo) and lexical (ella, (la) mujer) categories. In English the words in their roots, stems do not have any gender denoting suffix (beautiful for man and woman is same, unlike bonito/-a), but it has lexical gender category - the pronouns "He", "She".

Qazaq as many other Turkic Languages also has no such division between genders, and to that effect does not provide for the grammatical and lexical forms. Belonging either to masculine or feminine gender is rendered by the context. However such words as "бұл", "бұны", "мұны", "осы", "анау", "мынау", "ана", "мына", etc., and other pronouns can only denote the neuter gender.


Көпше түрі (Plural Form):

1. Біз, (біздер): адай-мыз, түркі-міз, адам-быз, үйден-біз, қазақ-пыз, түрік-піз
адай-мыздар, түркі-міздер, адам-быздар, үйден-біздер, қазақ-пыздар, түрік-піздер
We are: Adais (Adai - Qz Tribe), Turkics, Humans (human beings), (taking the way out of) from
the house, Qazaqs, Turks (Anadoly Turkey Turks)

2. Сендер/ Сіздер (You are):
Сендер - Анайы түрі (Direct Form): адам-сыңдар (humans), кісі-сіңдер (humans)
Сіздер - Сыпайы түрі (Polite Form): адам-сыздар, кісі-сіздер
You are (alltogether, all of you are): people, humans
3. Олар (Third Person): адам-дар, без-дер, қазақ-тар, өзбек-тер, жұмысшы-лар, кісі-лер
They are: humans, glands , Qazaqs (not Kazakh - russified word, I hate its 'kh'), Ozbeks, workers, humans (persons)
немесе жалғаусыз (or without endings)

[Rakhimzhan]

And one more contribution to the stock hehe... I feel myself a great linguist, the first discoverer, hehe. But, to be frankly, I doubt that there is any such open source with the dissected studies of Qz grammar to date . Sigh...

Another form, as I mentioned above, is "Тәуелдік жалғау" (Possessive Endings)
These are intended to show the relation between the object and subject (similar relation is with the cases, yet it is another topic), the possession of an object by the subject, the belonging of an object to the subject. They do oftenly correlate with the Genitive Case (will speak further about it), because the latter, if used in speach, requires the Possessive Endings.

Of course, there are another features with that PEs, which could not be covered by the topic. However, if one approached the basics, he/she would have feel more easy and flexible to adapt to that other features and incorporate them into their Qz knowledge base, putting them in the right place... I'll try to make it clear. So, the fun begins!

Тәуелдік жалғаулар (Possessive Endings)

Жекеше түрі (Single Form):

1. Бірінші жақ (First Person): -ым, -ім, -м,
2. Екінші жақ (Second Person):
Анайы түрі (Direct Form): -ың, -ің, -ң
Сыпайы түрі (Polite Form): -ыңыз, -іңіз, -ңыз
3. Үшінші жақ (Third Person): -сы, -сі, -ы, -і


Көпше түрі (Plural Form):

1. Бірінші жақ (First Person): -ымыз, -іміз, -мыз, міз
2. Екінші жақ (Second Person):
Анайы түрі (Direct Form): -ың, -ің, -ң
Сыпайы түрі (Polite Form): -ыңыз, -іңіз, -ңыз
3. Үшінші жақ (Third Person): -сы, -сі, -ы, -і

Note: the objects possessed can have their plural forms,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Мысалы (For Example):
[the word to be declined "кітап" - the "book"]

Жекеше түрі (Single Form):

1. Менің кітабым - my (mine) book Менің кітаптарым - my (mine) books
2. Сенің кітабың - your book Сенің кітаптарың - your books
Сіздің кітабыңыз - Your book Сіздің кітаптарыңыз - Your books
3. Оның кітабы - his/her book Оның кітаптары - his/her books

Көпше түрі (Plural Form):

1. Біздің кітабымыз - our book Біздің кітаптарымыз - our books
2. Сендердің кітабың - yours book Сендердің кітаптарың - yours books
Сіздердің кітабыңыз - Yours book Сіздердің кітаптарыңыз - Yours books
3. Олардың кітабы - their's book Олардың кітаптары - their's books

[Rakhimzhan]

Септік (Case)

Cases are a set of grammatical categories of nouns, pronouns, and adjectives, marked by inflection in some languages, indicating the relation of the noun, adjective, or pronoun to other words in the sentence. Qazaq has seven cases. They are:

1. Атау септік - Nominative Case
2. Ілік септік - Genitive Case
3. Барыс септік - Dative Case
4. Жатыс септік - Locative Case
5. Табыс септік - Accusative Case
6. Шығыс септік - Eative Case
7. Көмектес септік - Instrumental case

Тұлғалық және қызметтік септік сұрақтары (Wh- Case questions and Auxillary (adverbial, pronoun, prepositional) Case Questions):

1. Атау септік - кім? не? кімі? несі? | who? what?
2. Ілік септік - кімнің? ненің? | whose? of which?
3. Барыс септік - кімге? неге? қайда?| to whom? to what? to where?
4. Жатыс септік - кімде? неде? қайда?| with whom? with / at what? where?
5. Табыс септік - кімді? нені? | who? whom? what? which?
6. Шығыс септік - кімнен? неден? қайдан? | from whom? from what? from where?
7. Көмектес септік - кіммен? немен? | with whom? with what?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Септік жұрнақтары (Case Affixes):

1. Атау септік - жұрнақсыз (0-affix, without affx, just noun), ы, -і?
кітап, кітабы
2. Ілік септік - ның, -нің, -дың, -дің, -тың, -тің, (сының, -сінің,) -ының, -інің
кітабының, киімінің, базардың, көлдің, аттың, етіктің (анасының, әкесінің), қолының, ернінің
3. Барыс септік - ға, -ге, -қа, -ке, -на, -не, а, -е
базарға, киімге, саусаққа, емшекке, анасына, анаңа
4. Жатыс септік - да, -де, -та, -те, -ында, -інде
базарда, киімде, саусақта, бетте, -анасында, етігінде
5. Табыс септік - ды, -ді, -ты, -ті, -ны, -ні, -ын, -ін
базарды, көлді, атты, етікті, ананы, әкені, анасын, әкесін, қолын, емшегін
6. Шығыс септік - дан, -ден, -тан, -тен, -нан, -нен, -ынан, -інен
базардан, көлден, қотақтан, көттен, амнан, емнен, амынан, емінен
7. Көмектес септік - мен, -бен, пен
базармен, семізбен, себеппен

Note: U can decline the word either if it is in its initial noun form, or if it has Possessive Ending.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Түбір және тәуелді тұлғалары бар зат есімдерді септеу (Root Noun and Possessivized Noun Declension by Cases)

Ана - Mother
1. Атау септік - Ана (0-ending - the Mother), аналар (the mothers) анам (my mother), аналарым (my mothers), анаң (your mother), аналарың (your mothers), анаңыз (Your mother), аналарыңыз (Your mothers), анасы (his/her/their mother), аналары (his/her/their mothers).

2. Ілік септік - Ананың (of the Mother/Mother's), аналардың (of the mothers), анамның (of my mother), аналарымның (of my mothers/my mothers'), анамыздың (of our mother), аналарымыздың (of our mothers), анаңның (of your mother), аналарыңның (of your mothers), анаңыздың (of Your mother), аналарыңыздың (of Your mothers), анасының (of his/her/their mother), аналарының (of his/her/their mothers)

3. Барыс септік - Анаға (to the Mother), аналарға (to the mothers), анама (to my mother), аналарыма (to my mothers), анамызға (to our mother), аналарымызға (to our mothers), анаңа (to your mother), аналарыңа (to your mothers), анаңызға (to Your mother), аналарыңызға (to Your mothers), анасына (to his/her/their mother), аналарына (to his/her/their mothers)

4. Жатыс септік - Анада (at/with the Mother, i.e. when the mother holds/has smth with/in her - where?), аналарда (with the mothers), анамда (with my mother), аналарымда (with my mothers), анамызда (with our mother), аналарымызда (with our mothers), анаңда (with your mother), аналарыңда (with your mothers), анаңызда (with Your mother), аналарыңызда (with Your mothers), анасында (with his/her/their mother), аналарында (with his/her/their mothers)

5. Табыс септік - Ананы (the Mother, e.g. to love the mother - Accusative), аналарды (the mothers), анамды (my mother), аналарымды (my mothers), анамызды (our mother), аналарымызды (our mothers), анаңды (your mother), аналарыңды (your mothers), анаңызды (Your mother), аналарыңызды (Your mothers), анасын (his/her/their mother), аналарын (his/her/their mothers)

6. Шығыс септік - Анадан (from the Mother, e.g. to take advice from the mother), аналардан (from the mothers) анамнан (from my mother), аналарымнан (from my mothers), анамыздан (from our mother), аналарымыздан (from our mothers), анаңнан (from your mother), аналарыңнан (from your mothers), анаңыздан (from Your mother), аналарыңыздан (from Your mothers), анасынан (from his/her/their mother), аналарынан (from his/her/their mothers)

7. Көмектес септік - Анамен (together with the Mother, e.g. to play with the mother), аналармен (with the mothers), анаммен (with my mother), аналарыммен (with my mothers), анамызбен (with our mother), аналарымызбен (with our mothers), анаңмен (with your mother), аналарыңмен (with your mothers), анаңызбен (with Your mother), аналарыңызбен (with Your mothers), анасымен (with his/her/their mother), аналарымен (with his/her/their mothers)

[Rakhimzhan]

a couple of kazakh songs. a modern one:

Арман жолдар


Жолдар жолдар дала теңiз таулар асқан
Айы туып жұлдыз жанып баурап аспан
Жақсы жақсы жандар көрдiк жолда талай
Арман болған бақтың күсi конған талай

Тiрлiк тоғай сан адастық орманында
Қимас достар таптық өмiр жолдарында
Досты сүйген жүрегiммен сүйiм елiм
Туып өскен алдында бас ием елiм.

Арман болған бақтың құсы конған талай...

Досты сүйген жүрегiммен сүйем елiм...