Speech originalities of autochthon Georgians - Laz and Livanians - in Murghuli

ravine
(Questions of code-mixing and code-switching)

Theme actuality
One of the historical parts of south-west Georgia, Livana//Ligana//Nigali – speech
originalities of Lazian and Livanian autochthon Georgian inhabitants in Murghuli ravine are
discussed in thesis work. Mentioned part at present and historically is the zone of interconnection of
Lazian (privately – Khopian) and Meskhian (Livanian) dialects. Nowadays Murghuli ravine
belongs to Artvin Ili (province) of Turkey and is a ilçe (region). some village of ravine belongs to
neighbor Borcka region.
Dialect of Livanians from Murghuli is Murghuli-Livanian sub-dialect of Livanian dialect, and
Lazians - from Murghuli - Murghuli-Lazian sub-dialect of Khopuri dialect. Lazian moved lately
(from the beginning of XX century) from Lazeti sea-side communities (mostly from Athina and
artasheni ) are in ravine. So, with Murghuli-Lazian sub-dialect, Athena -Artashenuli dialect is
among Murghuleli Lazi (privately-Dutkhe and Ghvandi sub-dialects). Generally, it’s hard to
understand between Livanian and Lazian dialects; also it’s very hard to understand between Khopuri
Murghuli-Lazian sub-dialect and (on one hand) and Dutkhe and Ghvandi sub-dialects of Athena-
Artashenian (secondly).
Livanian and Laz inhabitants in Murghuli ravine know sub-dialects of each other. It’s
interesting, that there is homogenous, mixed Livanian- Lazian speech, which was used during every
day communications between Livanian and Lazi. Nowadays state language –Turkish has its
function, which in Murghuli ravine (and wholly –in historical south-west parts of Georgia: in Lazeti,
Tao, Imerkevi or elsewhere) functions as literary, so dialectical. Also its important to note, that old
generation of Murghuleli Georgians (mostly –more than 70 year old people) keep Georgian-Turkish
Pijini, which until mid period of 50 years of last century was used for communication between
Murghuleli and ethnic non Georgian, (before Turkish language schools were opened in ravine)
(mostly Georgian people are in Murghuli ravine, though there are many Khemshils {Muslim
Armenians}, gypsies and Tarakamas).
It follows from above-mentioned, at present both types of lingual codes mixing are considered
in Murghuli ravine –Code switching and Code mixing, herewith , as Georgian-Turkish bilingualism,
so Georgian (Lazian -Livanian ) diglossia is confirmed at the same time in ravine.
From Georgian linguists except a few, paid less attention to the issue of lingual codes mixing,
while in west it was and is paid great attention , for example, studying of transitive dialects,
creolized languages or Pijines started from II half of XIX century (Hugo Shukhardti) , nowadays
research of Idioms formed from language codes mixing is carried out on high level .
As it was already mentioned, at present Georgian-Turkish bilingualism and Georgian diglossia are
confirmed at the same time in Murghuli ravine that is why, it is very urgent to research lingual
situation here. For information-there are not many such regions in the world, where bilingualism and
diglossia are confirmed at the same time: Thus much difficult lingual situation supports codes
mixing and forming mixed speech (Pijini, Creole…). It is natural process, so its necessary to enlist
in time and with maximum precision as facts of interactive dialects (or languages), so slangs formed
from their mixing (Switching lingual-speech codes).
Generally, at present during lingual research in dwelling regions belonging to Turkey of
historical Georgian parts or ancestors of Georgian Muhajirs , its urgent to direct attention to speech
codes mixing , because Turkish is deemed as prestigious language, and autochthon Georgians don’t
have opportunity to be educated even elementary education in native language . (They are able to
speak Georgian only in family and native villages). Accordingly, Georgian speech of this place
faces the threat of extinction.
In Turkey local linguists showed less interest (and show) for issues of lingual codes mixing
before, even though most of the regions of Turkey (particularly outskirt parts) were bilingual from
the beginning and are at present. Also it’s interesting, that research of Turkish dialects in Turkey
started from the second half of XX century.-while Turkology was formed from the beginning of the
same century as a private branch abroad. Turkish linguists nowadays –on account of clear reasons –
avoid talking about foreign substrate in Turkish dialects, even though it is fact. Although, in this
regard, there are exceptions- for instance we should name Georgian scientist Turgut Ajari, who
investigates Turkish dialects of Artvini.
So, we think, theme of our thesis work is too actual.

Tasks, object and purpose of research

The purpose of research was to describe and analyze report showing interaction of Georgian
dialects (Murghulur-Livanian and Murghulur-Lazuri) considering the hardest lingual situation in
Murghuli ravine from the beginning; we also reviewed, in general, the issues of interaction of
Livanian and Lazian dialects in Murghuli ravine, on one hand- Murghulur- Lazian dialects (which
is a part of Khopuri dialect) and on the second hand dialects of Lazi moved in Murghuli from
Athena and Artasheni communities: issues of Dutkhuri and Ghvanduri inter action and so on.
Also research purpose was to review the most important issues of Georgian-Turkish lingual
codes mixing, though adding here, that it was not our aim to study Turkish dialectal speech of
Murghuli ravine (In which Georgian substrate is noticeable, we studied only Georgian -Turkish
Pijini, discussed its relations with autochthon Georgians dialects of Murghuli –Livanian
(Murghulur-Livanian) and Khopuri (Murghulur-Lazian).
It follows from all above-mentioned, Murghulur-Livanian, Murghulur- Lazian dialects,
Athena –Artashenian dialect (its time to say: speech of Lazi ancestors moved in Murghuli ravine
from Athena –Artasheni communities), Switching of Georgian code (Lazian -Livanian) and
Georgian-Turkish Pijini were in research object.
Accordingly, our main task was:
1) Showing –establishing Murghulur-Livanian and Murghulur- Lazian originalities;
2) Establishing similarities and differences between these dialects,
3) Showing primary and secondary mutual vocabulary in mentioned dialects;
4) Review the main characteristics of Georgian speech codes switching;
5) Review general issues of Georgian-Turkish inter action.
The results of research
During research much originality was revealed, that were never discussed in scientific
literature, or they were not paid proper attention. Each such fact is properly shown in our work.
In general, theses of western linguists are defined in thesis work that were formed from
European specificity and so far were used in Georgian linguistic invariably. We tried, to envisage
Georgian specificity and after conclude.
Importance of work in theoretic and practical standpoint
Our thesis work concerns to issue, that is too important in contemporary linguistic during
research of dialectical differentiation language history, or relative or non relative Idioms relation. At
the same time, regarding Georgian lingual system, studying of speech codes mixing will allow us to
establish these regulations that promoted to form Georgian dialects of different groups in different
periods of language history- as it is known, there were many standpoints relative to this, that were
wrong and accordingly against interests of Georgian nation in Georgian soviet science of language.
 Research method
During working on thesis work we used Diasystemic and historical-comparative methods of
research.
Also we paid attention to field work together with working out scientific literature about work
theme-we got trustful dialectic texts, observed speech of Georgians from Murghuli locally –in the
villages of Murghuli ravine; as far as it was possible, envisaged typical originality of almost every
village in thesis work; represented research results stage by stage, in scientific papers or articles; that
we read at scientific conferences or published while working on thesis work.
Thesis work consists 253 pages and is divided in four chapters; is enclosed with introduction
and conclusion, list of used and quoted literature.

Introduction:
General description of Murghuli ravine
Location of Murghuli ravine, villages. Murghuli ravine is situated in Turkish republic on
border of Lazeti (Chaneti) and Livana (Ligana, Nigali) two historical parts of south-west Georgia.
Outfall of River Murghuli is in Chaneti Mountains, which Inflows River Chorokhi in the lower
reaches of the river, south-east of city Borchkha.
Murghuli ravine, as a separate historical-geographic unit, includes not only villages on
both banks of river Murghuli, but also its outfall down side -several populated points located on left
bank of Chorokhi. Overall, ravine area is 450 km 2, relief is mountainous. Side is rich with useful
fossils. By modern administrative division, most part of Murghuli ravine belongs to Murghuli region
of Artvini Ili of Turkish republic (province), smaller part -in Borchkhi region of the same Ili.
At present, administrative center of Murghuli region is city Murghuli, that is called
Chinkatkhevi or Chinkaghals//Chinkaghele by local population. It is located in upper side of
Murghuli ravine.
1.2. Inhabitants of Murghuli ravine. Murghuli ravine has 10 000 inhabitants according to (2008 y)
recent information of Turkey. 3 500 people live in city Murghuli of Murghuli region, in the villages-
4 0001, about 2 500 people live in the villages belonging to Borchkhi region.
99% of ravine inhabitant is Georgian –Lazi or Livanian. Most Lazi people are in Bujuri, in
Aducha down district of Durcha, in Komo/tsaleni kura of Kura district, Ereguna and Avana; though
generally, they live with Livanian people in almost every village of down Murghuli (in city
Murghuli too) and accordingly, speak Lazian and Livanian more or less equally. Mostly Livanian
people live in upper Murghuli. As upper Murghuli inhabitants so down Murghuli inhabitants have
close relationship with each other and also with Lazebi dwelling in Chkhali or Orchi ravines.
In addition, there are many Lazi people in villages of upper side of ravine moved from
Athena- Artasheni communities, who speak only native Lazian (Athena-Artashenuli) and Turkish
dialects on the whole or have poor knowledge of Livanian, they call Lazi people from Murghuli
Chanurepe or “Chanelebi”. Livanian also call Chanebi not only from Murghuli but generally every
Lazi. Liganurepe is a traditional name of Livanian people in Lazi, and Ligana is for Livana. In order
to obtain more specific information about their own origination
Lazebi from Murghuli and Livanian people use term Murghulari “Murghuleli”. It’s also
noticeable, that officially listed names are not used.
Except Georgians, Tarakamebi inhabit in ravine villages (one of the local ethno group of
Turkey), Kurds and khemshilebi too (Muslim Armenians); they rarely know Livanian or/and Lazian.
As a rule, officially, each dweller of Murghuli region despite of ethnic origination is deemed as
Turkish. Each Georgian from Murghuli knows also, state language-Turkish (except a few very old
men). At present, it is not infrequently used simultaneously of Georgian dialects in every day life
and families.
1.3. From historical past of Murghuli ravine. Ravine of river Murghuli, as the whole Livana
and Lazeti was the part of Klarjeti of one of the Georgian “country” in old times. Klarjeti was a part
of old Kartli (Iberia) as Saeristavo. Eristavi residence was in Artanuji. Vakhtang Gorgasali has built
Church-monasteries here. In VIII century royal dynasty of Bagrationi was settled here, reign of
which lasted until XIX century in Georgia. In VIII century Arabs ravaged Klarjeti. Part of saved
people was annihilated by epidemic. In IX century king Ashot I restored side and started monastery
construction on Grigol Khandzteli initiative. There were built many Georgian church-monasteries in
Klarjeti.
In XVI-XVII centuries Klarjeti with other Georgian historical-ethnographic sides was
conquered by Ottomans. They made local population become Muslims by force, though could not
make them forget native language and traditions. In XVIII century Ottomans allocated LIvana in
Lazistani Phashadom as a separate region. It is clear, this administrative unit included Murghuli
ravine too.
As a result of 1877-1878 YY Russia-Ottoman, Adzharia, shavshev-Imerkhevi, Tao and
Livana including Murghuli fell to Russian empire lot. Also Small part of Lazeti fell under empire
boundaries –Chkhali and Beghlevani ravines. Russians united the whole this territory in Batumi
region. From the end of 1878, Muhajiroba or exile of Muslim Georgians in Ottoman Empire was
started in newly annexed Georgian sides, also-in Murghuli ravine. Russian officials with ottoman
agents and Muslim clerics actively encouraged people to exile in ottomans.
In 1911 famous Georgian linguist Ioseb Kipshidze traveled in Murghuli ravine –he collected
information about Lazian speech. By the way, he notes, that there was copper foundry factory built
by English people in village Chinkatkhevi. Workers from different parts of Russia and Turkey came
here for work. There was bazaar, school, where except Russian, Georgian and Turkish languages
were taught for children of Georgian Muslims and hotel, the owners of which were Shalva Paghava
and Mikheil Gabunia came from Samegrelo; According to Kipshidze this time Chinkatkhevi slowly
appropriated common name of ravine-“Murghuli” (Kipshidze 1911, pg.II-III).
During the First World War –after starting military actions on Caucasus front (1914 y. 2
November); in ottomans invaded Russian army was soon forced to retreat and took defensive
position. General of infantry Nikolai Istomin, who leaded attack, blamed this failure on “Georgian
legion” and local Georgian Muslims –According to general this latter took in rear Russian army
when Georgian legion in staff of Ottomans army was involved in battle and made Russians to
retreat. It is noticeable, that this information of Istomini is not quite true, -“Georgian legion” was not
involved in military actions, and Georgian Muslims were irritated on account of arbitrariness of
Russian soldiers.
Lately, when Ottomans captured Murghuli province as a result of next attack and threatened
Artvini, failure of Russian army was blamed on Georgian again -Russian generals informed deputy
Vorontsov-Dashkovi lots of secret reports, where they described “betray” of Georgians in detail. On
5 November of 1914 Ottomans conquered Artvini and continued going in advance to Batumi. There
was a panic in Russian army-soldiers refused to place under the command to commanders and
retreated in disorder.
Soon, Russian army defeated Ottomans at Sarikamishi and started powerful counter-attack
from 17-19 January of 1915 and in the end Ottomans armies were banished from Batumi and Karsi
regions in March of the same year. Military actions moved in Ottoman territory directly (Lazistani
Sanjaki). In such circumstance, leading by General Vladimer Liakhovi in Batumi region, punitive
subunits of Cossacks were sent, who should establish order here.
Inhabitants of Murghuli ravine revolted against Cossacks arbitrariness, but Russians
repressed actions of the masses, and twice increased the number of soldiers set in the villages. They
destroyed most people of revolt leaders or caught and exiled in Siberia. According to English
historian David Lengi, during this operation Liakhovi armies victimized 100 thousand inhabitants of
Murghuli ravine. Extremely oppressed Murghuleli, who could not resist, decided to go as Muhajiri
in Ottomans –In summer of 1915 the first stream of Muhajiri crossed the front line and moved in
Lazistani Sanjaki.
Insignificant part of Murghuleli Muhajiri under the weather abroad
At last went back to homeland in December 1917, when Russian army left Caucasus. Returning
process of Muhajirs lasted almost until 1920 year, and with significant hinders. Because of different
reasons, more than half of Georgian Muhajirs left from ravine could not go back to native land and
were forced to stay in west Turkey for ever, where their descendents still live here.
Since 1920 Murghuli ravine, as a part of Batumi region belonged to the first republic of
Georgia. And by Karsi treaty power of 1922 it was assigned to republic of Turkey.
Lingual situation in Murghuli (General review)
2.1. For classification of Georgian speech units widespread in Murghuli ravine.
Lazian speech of Zanian group of Georgian marginal dialects is spread in Murghuli ravine
-Khopuri and (Partially) Athena-Artashenuli dialects; also-Livanian dialect in Meskhetian group.
Mixing of speech codes is fixed in ravine that is why Lazian and Livanian are characterized with
much originality. It follows from that, that this version of Khopuri dialect, which is spoken by
inhabitant Lazians of Murghuli, we call Murghulur-Lazian, and speech of Livanian inhabitants of
Murghuli, accordingly- Murghulur-Livanian.

Murghulur-Lazian sub-dialect belongs to Chkhaluri sub-dialect. Lazian speech (more

exactly-Khopuri) widespread in river Chkhala ravine is marked by this latter name in the north of
Murghuli ravine. Chkhaluri is the least studied – for the first time it was described by Ioseb
Kipshidze in 10 years of the last century and Professor Guram Kartozia was in Chkhala in 1991-
1992 YY. He wrote the texts and published some of them.
As it is already said Murghulur-Livanian sub-dialect is a part of Livanian dialect. This
latter is less studied: For the first time Livanian texts were written in 80 years of the last century
and lately Professor Shushana Putkaradze published it. (Sh. Putkaradze 1993, pg. 296-334) she
briefly reviewed in her dissertation typical effects of Livanian dialect with other Georgian dialects
widespread in Turkey. Kirnat-Maradiduli sub-dialect of mentioned dialect is researched by
Professor Nargiza Surmava.
Also Athena-Artashenuli dialect is widespread in Murghuli ravine, which was mostly spoken by
Lazi descendents moved from sea side Lazeti Athena and Artasheni communities in XIX-XX. Most
of them live in village Ereguna and city Murghuli. Their speech is closer to the speech of upper zone
villages of Athena and Artasheni communities. (Ghvandi, Dutkhe, Komilo, Vizha…) although, it is
natural that Murghulur-Lazian influence is obvious.
2.2 Turkish language and Georgian –Turkish pijini in Murghuli. Turkish language is
generally widespread in Murghuli ravine –as already mentioned, at present it is used in every day
communications and families in parallel of Georgian dialects. It is stipulated, because Murghuleli
people as other Georgian citizens of Turkish republic are educated in Turkish .Official business
correspondence and TV-radio channels broadcasting are made in this language.
It is noticeable that Turkish language in Murghuli functions in two ways: 1) as official
literary and 2) as colloquial-dialectical; the first -during official communications and in mass media,
also in schools, the second- in daily life. There is a perceptible difference between standard and
dialectical Turkish.
Analyze of actual literature about research question
Our thesis work concerns to questions of mixing-inter actions and relations with Turkish language
of Khopuri (privately-Murghulur-Lazian sub dialect) and Livanian (Murghulur-Livanian sub dialect)
of dialectical units of Zanian and Meskhuri group, which have not been studied properly by anyone
so far.
It follows from that, literature analyzed by us should be divided in two groups: 1) literature
about Lazian and Livanian dialects; 2) literature about speech codes mixing and diglossia.
We used more than 200 kinds of articles or monographs in Georgian and foreign
languages while working on dissertation work, full list of which are enclosed to our work.

I Chapter:
General originalities of Livanian speech
(According to Murghuli ravine information)
We will discuss general originalities typical for Livanian speech of Murghuli in the first chapter
of thesis work, based on corresponding scientific literature and findings obtained by us. We give
lots of illustrated phrases in order to present/analyze general tasks of mentioned theme clearly.
Phonetic originalities. There are long vowels of secondary origination with five simple vowels (A,
E, I, O, U) in Murghuli-Livanian vowels system. Palatalized is too rare, which are mostly observed
in loanwords from Turkish language, it is too rare, neutral, with consonant dividing function. Only
simple vowels have phonetic value, the rest of are positional sounds.
Consonants system almost completely coincides with Consonants system of literary language
and other Georgian dialects. 30 consonants are confirmed. 25 of them are chkamieri, 5 -sonorous.
On the other hand, spirant consonants are divided into occlusive and breaking, sonorous- nasal and
oral.
Morphological originalities. Murghuli-Livanian takes uniform transitive place with
morphological originalities between Khopuri dialect (privately, its chkhaluri sub dialect) and east
sub dialect of Livanian dialect.
Borchkha-Livanian sub dialect is close to it, kirnat-maradidian speech is part of this, which is
widespread in Georgia at present.
Case type is one in Murghulur-Livanian, but there are several types within this one type-
there are name groups because of case originalities. It is noticeable, that according to case
originalities in Murghulur-Livanian sub dialect should be allocated six groups of names,
instead of eight, as Professor Tariel Putkaradze allocated in literary language, though eight groups
system is starting;
Name characteristics of the first and second groups will be the same as literary ,herewith,
firstly these names will be combined by professor Tariel Putkaradze after the example of literary
language, mark of nominative case in the sixth group in the names of the third group is –I or zero;
narrative-man; and in genitive and instrumental cases have two allophone of marks : -is//-s and –
it//-t, also these names will be combined in the third group , that are combined in the fifth group
after literary example by Tariel Putkaradze.:
General characteristics will be the same in the fourth, seventh and eighth groups as in literaly
language.
In Murghulur-Livanian, from paradigm originalities side verb generally follows to
Meskhetian dialect, though is close to Khopuri dialect. In general, Georgian verbal system is well
protected here.
Like Georgian literary language and dialects, verb does not have infinitive in Murghulur-
Livanian sub dialect. As a rule, it’s replaced by initial or verbal noun, which is a declinable word.
All these prefixes are confirmed in Murghulur-Livanian, that we have in literary language;
Prefix replacement cases are observed too. Herewith, it is noticeable, that preferentially in
Murghulur-Livanian action place or direction is given with prefix.
 Professor Tariel Putkaradze presented Georgian verbal forms as three levels paradigm
(Putkaradze 2012), where the first level forms are made by vowel prefixes, causative and other
semantic originalities different verbal forms. The second level is made by tense-mood-aspect
different verbal forms (row forms), the third- different person and number forms.
These theses of Prof. Tariel Putkaradze were used in order to construct Murghulur-
Livanian and Murghuli-Lazian verbal paradigms. Herewith, paradigms of both mentioned sub
dialects are little different from literary language paradigms- generally difference is phonetic and
does not put actual obstacles. It is also noticeable, that verbal paradigms constructed according to
these theses of Prof. Putkaradze show comparably perfectly Murghulur-Livanian and Murghulur-
Lazian verb system, as of other Georgian dialects.
From the difference of literary language, in the first level (high) paradigm of Murghulur-
Livanian sub dialect verbal forms are also one-valency and two-valency forms of potential action ,
and in the second level (classical) paradigm form of future tense, conjunctive mood and perfect
aspect are missed , the rest of paradigms are identical of literary language.
General syntactic facts. Transitive verb makes ergative construction in I and II series: “woman
was cooking”, “woman has cooked “-there is identical situation in Lazian dialects also. herewith,
Murghulur-Livanian is different from Lazian dialect on the one hand, and on the other hand from
literary language , because there are not strict norms whether transitive verb makes ergative
construction-only in II (as in literary language) or in I also (as in Lazian dialects) series.

II chapter:
General originalities of Lazian speech
(According to Murghuli ravine information)
In the first chapter of thesis work we discuss general originalities of Livanian speech of
Murghuli based on proper scientific literature and findings obtained by us.
2.1. Phonetic originalities. In general, vowels system of Lazian dialects is simple. Like
literary Georgian, there are five simple vowel phoneme: a,e,i,o,u. They are presented in three
Lazian dialects.
Consonants system of Lazian dialects almost completely coincides with Consonants system
of literary language and other Georgian dialects. 30 consonants are confirmed. 26 of them are
chkamieri, 4 -sonorous. On the other hand, chkamieri consonants are divided into occlusive and
breaking, sonorous- nasal and oral.
From specific consonants f is notable, which is a perfect phoneme at present.
2.2 Morphological originalities. There are two types of cases in Lazian dialects –one theme
and two themes. Historically consonant theme names in singular number are characterized by
two themes cases. They have nominative case mark -i in other cases too; historically vowel
theme names are characterized by one theme case. It is notable, that all names in plural number
are characterized by two themes cases.
In consequence of cases originalities in Murghulur-Livanian sub dialect, based on
classification of Prof. Tariel Putkaradze, we divided 6 groups. (Instead of 8 groups of literary
language). Here we noted that such circumstance is secondary and is the result of leveling. In
Lazian dialects leveling process is further, privately:
The first, second and eight group names will be combined as one group in Lazian
dialects-as two themes. They will have i of nominative case in dative and narrative cases: these
names will be combined in this group, which are combined in the sixth group by Prof. Tariel
Putkaradze after literary language example.
The third, fourth and fifth group names are combined in separate group with the
following mark- nominative mark is zero, case marks are enclosed to theme directly.
 In comparison with literary language, there are more prefixes and in comparison with
Megrelian dialect-fewer.
According to Prof. Tariel Putkaradze we constructed Murghulur-Lazian verbal paradigms.
From the difference of another Lazian dialects and sub dialects, in Murghulur-Lazian
verbal paradigm one valency form of addressed action is typical, also-two valency forms- such
style is rare in other Lazian dialects. From difference of literary language, there are one valency
and two valency forms of potential action in the first level (big) paradigm of verbal forms. And
in the second level (classical) paradigm forms of future tense, conjunctive mood and perfect
aspect are missed, in return for we have many conditional mood forms, the rest of paradigms are
identical of literary language.
2.3. General syntactic facts. Transitive verb makes ergative construction, case marks
are added to I and II verb person forms, which function as modifier particle: “When Khasani
came, I was sleeping…”

III chapter
Questions of Livanian and Lazian speech inter-influence
3.1. The main point of speech code mixing and code switching. There are two main
types of lingual codes mixing in special literature: code mixing and code switching; the first
stage means diachronical process- obtaining C lingual code on the basis of A and B lingual
codes mixing, the second type means synchronous process- contacting co-existence of A and B
lingual codes in equal (when both lingual codes are equal) or unequal (when one of the lingual
code is more prestigious) conditions.
3.2. Speech codes mixing in Murghuli ravine. One of the best sample of code-switching
is this: (“My name is Zahide and I know Georgian {Livanian}, Lazian, Turkish, but have not
learnt {“read”}”). That is an extract form written text of Lazian old woman in down Murghuli –
Zahide Ozildizi. Five types of code switching are confirmed in mentioned sentence:
1) Tag-switching-(Lazian+ Livanian);
2) Intrasentential switching-(Turkish +Livanian);
3) Extrasentential switching-(Livanian + Turkish)
4) Phonemic-morphemic switching--(Turkish +Livanian);
5) calque switching_ (Turkish phrase, constructed according to Livanian {Georgian} norm).
One sample of Lazian-Livanian Phonemic-morphemic and kalkuri switching is also
this fixed sentence during talking with down Murghuleli: (“It turned out this horse went to
Borchkha and Khemshilebi saw here somehow”).
3.3. Separation of dialects/languages historical inter-influence and systemic identity in
contemporary linguistic. We have already noted above, that forms made on the basis of
dialects systemic identity and inter-influence should be differed from each other abruptly. This
principle was not protected in Georgian soviet linguistic, as far as Megrelian-Lazian and Svanian
dialects were deemed as kindred lingual systems separated from Georgian and accordingly ,
many facts confirming systemic identity between them and Georgian dialects were often
deemed to be formed under the influence of Georgian (or on the contrary) .
Systemic Identity and inter-influence of dialects/languages are already abruptly separated in
contemporary western linguistic.
3.4. Forms and facts formed (or kept) as a result of Lazian-Livanian historical inter-
influence in Murghulur-Livanian and Murghulur-Lazian. Historical interrelation of
Livanian dialect of Meskhetian dialect group and Khopuri dialect of Megrelian-Lazian dialects
group in Murghuli ravine also formed switched dialect, herewith, we are able to suppose, that
switched dialect might be originated when ottomans conquered South Georgia once and for all,
strictly forbade here activity of apostolic Orthodox Church of Georgia, forced local Georgians to
be converted Islamic (XVII C); this all was followed naturally by weakening literary Georgian
language position in this region.
Switched dialect was somehow a temporary way in order two Georgian
communities not to break off relations with each other during ottomans expansion;
Switched dialect of Lazian –Livanian played similar “mediator” role between dialects
indeed, it’s formation as a dialect was impeded because of deliberated factor.
It follows from above-mentioned, that we should deem forms or facts as
formed as a result of historical inter-influence of Lazian and Livanian dialects, which are
formed not by systemic identity, but “mediated” by Lazian-Livanian switched dialect.
3.5. Lexical fund formed/kept as a result of historical inter-influence in Murghulur-
Livanian and Murghulur-Lazian. It’s generally known, that first of all inter-influence of
languages and dialects is shown in lexicology. Word loaning is too natural and factually,
limitless process, especially in cases of Diglossia and Bilingualism.
When we are talking about formation of common lexical fund of secondary origination
as a result of historical inter-influence between dialects, we should define more exactly ,that we
can deem as loaned only branch lexicology from dialect-into dialect (or from sub dialect
into sub dialect) , or these words, which denote specific realias characterized for
community with each dialect/sub dialect. For example, terminology of navigation, carpenter
and oil construction in Murghulur-Livanian is from Lazian, some terms of hunt and cookery and
names of these plants, which are imported in Murghuli from Lazeti… also for the most,
terminology of cattle-breeding and bee-keeping is Livanian in Murghulur-Lazian, names of
these plants, which do not grow in Lazeti, names of these dishes, that are not known in Lazeti
and etc.
3.6. Contacts of Athena-Artashenuli with Khopuri and Livanian in Murghuli ravine.
Descendents of Lazebi live in several villages of Murghuli ravine moved at different times
from Lazeti, Athena and Artasheni communities, many of them have protected native Athena-
Artashenuli dialect more or less well.
Dialect of Lazi people from Athena and Artasheni inhabiting in Murghuli ravine joined
to Dutkhuri speech of Athena sub dialect of Athena-Artashenuli and Ghvandur-Dzghemur sub
dialect; though influence of Murghulur-Lazian and Chkhaluri sub dialects of Khopuri dialect is
too obvious.

VI chapter:
Questions of Georgian and Turkish dialect codes mixing
4.1. General review. In Murghuli ravine as in other historical parts of south-west Georgia-
Turkish (more exactly-Ottoman) gains a foothold in the XVII-XVIII centuries: In this period
Ottomans finished annexation of Lazeti, Tao-Klarjeti and Samtskhe-Javakheti and accordingly,
announced Ottoman-Turkish here as the only official language, and strictly forbade activity of
Georgian Orthodox Church in annexed sides.
4.2. North-east Turkey in Turkish dialects for common Georgian (Caucasian) facts.
The main interesting fact for us, which is noted by almost all Turkologist are so called
“Caucasian sharps” (p,t,k,ts,ch.)in north-east Turkish dialects. Known Turkologist, Rozalia
Shori noted in 1930, that sharp consonants were confirmed in Turkish language population
living in Artvin-Artaani (Turkey) and Atskuri (Georgia): “It is interesting, that these clear
sounds are not only in Georgian or Lazian loanwords, but in basic Turkish words.”
Herewith, famous Russian linguist of Georgian-Scottish origination –Nikolai (Niko)
Mari and his son orientalist Iuri Mari testify above given information of Rozalia Shori in mutual
work “remarks regarding Turkish language of Abastumani environment” (In Russian language,
Moscow-Leningrad, 1937) and cite dozens of other examples confirming availability of
Georgian sharp consonant sounds in Turkish dialect.
Availability of sharp consonants is denoted also in Turkish dialects widespread in
historical Lazeti and Rize-of-Trabzon. (See more about it -articles and monographs of Bert
Bradman, Afrasiab Vekilov and especially Miika Riasianen).
4.3. Word-themes of Georgian origination in Turkish dialectical lexicology.
Especially intensely, Georgian substrate shows itself in the north –east dialects lexicology,
where thousand Georgian word-themes are found: For example. In the dictionary of Artvinul-
Karsuli dialect, which is published in the Internet, on web-page http://www.artvinliyiz.net and
includes more than 30 thousand words, we have confirmed about 9 thousand Georgian themes or
words.
4.4. Contemporary Georgian-Turkish Pijini in Murghuli ravine. At present Georgian-
Turkish Pijini is used in many cases in Murghuli ravine-during communication with Turkish
language Individuals, These old people speak Pijini, who do not know Turkish language well.
When parents want to say something in presence of children under age in families (Poor
Turkish connoisseur) they use Pijini. Pijini is also kept in jokes and other similar memorials of
folk speech, where Individuals with poor knowledge of Turkish and Georgian (Lazian and
Livanian) are overacted.
As a rule, Pijini is based on Artvinul-Turkish dialect-has its grammatical structure,
though phonetics and lexicology are Georgian.
4.5. Toponyms of Murghuli ravine in standpoint of Georgian-Turkish dialect codes
mixing. In 50 years of last century, each toponym of non Turkish was origination was officially
changed with Turkish names in Turkey.
Old (Georgian) and new (official) names of Murghuli ravine villages are mostly formed
from different themes. Rarely, old theme is kept in Turkish name, sometimes Georgian name is
not kept and phonetically modified Turkish name is used instead of it. Nowadays Etymology of
great part of Georgian names of populated points is vague.
As for Turkish names of the villages: principle of their names is absolutely different: too
rarely, It is possible to be certain semantic affinity between Georgian and Turkish names, Micro
toponym of Murghuli ravine villages is too interesting in standpoint of dialects codes mixing.
Herewith, this should be noted also, that districts and places of the villages not infrequently have
bilingual –Georgian-Turkish names. Young generation knows Turkish names mostly, only old
people remember Georgian. Here this should be noted also, that sometimes unofficial names are
used in parallel with Turkish name, which is also Turkish.
4.6. Georgian-Turkish dialects codes mixing in anthroponomy. As it follows from Muslim
traditions, at present people from Murghuli use names of eastern origination (Arabic, Turkish,
Persian…); herewith, each name is confirmed as phonetically changed.
Besides, as a rule, official form of names given here are different from confirmed forms
between Murghuleli people, it is interesting, that not infrequently, these names appear as
abbreviated or with Georgian diminutive suffixes. Herewith, abbreviated form of this or that
name, sometimes appear separate, as independent anthroponomy. As a rule, last syllable or
sound is removed when name is abbreviated : Mustava-Musta, Resan-Resa,Shemsuddin-
Shemsu//Shemso, Nurettin-Nuret, Abdula-Abdu, Ibrehim-Ibre//Ibro, Zelikhe-Zeli,
Meriem-Meri, Sabrie-Sabi, Asie-Asi, Urie//Khurie-Uri//Khuri,Dursun-Duri,Nurulla-Nuri
and etc. Diminutive suffixes may be added to these abbreviated forms: Resa-Resuka,
Khusein-Khusika,Shemso-Shemsikina, Zeli-Zelina,Uri-Uriko…
In some cases, diminutive form of name is significantly different from perfect form and in
turn, is formed from diminutive again.
 Conclusion
In Murghuli ravine, where during centuries autochthonous Georgian (Lazian and Livanian
dialects) and more prestigious Turkish lingual systems (standard norm and Artvinuli dialect)
lingual systems co-exist, as Georgian (Lazian-Livanian) diglossia, so Georgian-Turkish
bilingualism are fixed at the same time . This may be considered as a unique fact; although, to
certain extent similar situation is confirmed also in other directly bordering sides of Georgia-
Turkey: river Beghlevanistskali ravine (Borchkha region, Turkey), in both sides of Sarpy,
(Khopi region, Turkey and Khelvachauri region, Georgia) and etc.
In general, actual lingual situation in Murghuli ravine is valued as the most difficult:
dialect of autochthon Georgians does not have an official status here; accordingly is absolutely
unprotected from bad influence of Turkish language, although noting here, that Georgian-
Turkish Pijini , which was widespread in ravine before, is too rarely used nowadays, and thus –
factually, there are not conditions for its creolization, that should certainly be followed by
Georgian dialect absolute extinction here.
On a basis of actual lingual situation analyze in Murghuli ravine nowadays, it is possible to
establish the following- general theses:
1. Dialect codes mixing process between dialects of one language, as a rule is more active in
these places, where on account of certain reasons, common-national literary language does
not function partially or at all. In such circumstances formation of switched dialect is
related to national interests- Communities with different dialects keep close connection
through switched or mixed dialect norms, in order national territory not to be broken into
pieces and to oppose possible assimilation risks.
2. On the one hand variation of Livanian dialect –Murghulur-Livanian sub
dialect , and on the second hand variation of Khopuri dialect –Murghulur-
Lazian sub dialect drew together closely through Lazian-Livanian
switched dialect. Exactly they make transitional dialect on the one hand, in
detail between Khopuri and Livanian dialects and on the second hand –
between Zanian and Meskhetian groups of general Georgian marginal
dialects.
3. Switched dialect may not be formed as a separate dialect/sub dialect, if
deliberated factor impedes it: switched dialect is considered as less
prestigious and mostly is considered as “tortured language/dialect”. If
mentioned deliberated factor is weakened or disappeared, switched dialect
may be developed as an independent dialect –there are lots of samples of
this all over the world.
4. In so called transitive dialect, there is a great possibility of keeping general
facts as original, as inculcation of innovations. Herewith, as transitive
dialect is considered as a part of some dialects in many cases, these
protected facts in it, which basic dialect does not have or have as changed,
frequently seems to be loaned.
5. Only branch vocabulary may be considered as loaned from dialect in
dialect (or from sub dialect in sub dialect), these words, which denote
specific realias defined for communities with each of this dialect/sub
dialect.
6. In Georgian lingual system, facts formed on the basis of systemic identity
and inter-influence should be abruptly differed from each other. This
principle was not protected in Georgian soviet linguistic, because
researchers considered Megrelian –Lazian and Svanian dialects as
separated, kindred lingual systems from Georgian and accordingly,
 considered lots of actual /confirmed facts confirming systemic identity
between them and other Georgian dialects as formed under the influence
of Georgian (or contrary).
7. On the basis of studying and analyzing obtained information directly in
Murghuli ravine , we were assured, that both sub dialects might be
considered as mixed or to say in a different way –transitive/peripheral
dialects fairly: each of them is characterized by the facts of Zanian and
Meskhetian group dialects , On the one hand, exactly, that is why
Murghulur-Livanian is different from other sub dialects of Livanian dialect
, and on the second hand, Murghulur-Lazian- from other sub dialects of
Khopuri dialect.
8. Murghulur-Livanian is a sub dialect of Meskhetian type
, Murghulur-Lazian-Zanian: that is why they are different from each other.
Lazian-Livanian switched dialect is not predisposed to be formed as an
independent dialect, because “deliberated factor” functions in this case.
9. This fact, that autochthon Georgian people living in Murghuli ravine –Lazian and
Livanian know dialects of each other more or less equally, not infrequently speak switched
Lazian-Livanian, it means, that they realized their own ethnic unity from the beginning
and were able to keep originality.
10. Georgian-Turkish Pijini was not creolized in Murghuli ravine-Autochthon Georgian
people could protect themselves from actual danger of foreign environment by keeping
close connections and did not master Turkish as a native language , even though they
contacted with Turkish origination/Turkish language inhabitants on their ethnic territory
almost every day :
11. The processes went on interestingly in Murghuli ravine: Local Georgian communities
could protect as their national identity and ethnic unity, so internal communities diversity
and were not estranged for each other. For information: nowadays in Turkey a great part of
Lazian people does not identify themselves with “Gurjebi”, local Muslim Georgian
people, not to say anything about Georgian citizens.
12. Georgian people of Murghuli ravine kept national originality and internal community
division equally up today , but at present they are ahead of new challenges –Official
language (Turkish), which functioned only nominally until 50 years of last century not
only in ravine, but also in the north-east Turkey ( In historical south-west Georgia for
Georgian people ), expanded usage sphere perceptibly (Already to say-started
functioning ) , combined these functions, that Georgian-Turkish Pijini had and these
functions , that Lazian-Livanian switched dialect had.
13. Turkish language is used in parallel of Georgian dialect (Lazian and Livanian dialects)
frequently in families –so, it slowly combines the functions of native language of
Georgian people. (Presented as dialects and not as literary norm in Turkey). Besides
lingual, it presages cultural assimilation too.
14. It should not be difficult for Georgian inhabitants of Murghuli ravine (as generally-
Georgians of Turkey) to take effective steps in order to protect national originality, ethnic
unity and originality –at first, we mean to protect national language and transferring it to
future generations.
Existence of Murghulur- Livanian and Murghulur-Lazian dialects type of dialectical units
is confirmed or is presumably spreading other variations of Georgian lingual systems on
borders : we name from them: Choluruli, Kodoruli, Abashur-Imeruli and other dialects , it
is urgent work to study them in detail.
Articles of Mikheil Labadze about thesis theme:
1. Vowels system of Lazian dialects,”Georgian heritance” XII, Kutaisi, 2008;
2. Phonetic originalities of Lazian dialect of Murghuli ravine (Turkey),” Problems of
linguistic Georgian and Abkhazian studies”, volume II, Tbilisi 2010;
3. “Year book II of Kutaisi scientific library named after Ilia Chavchavadze , Kutaisi ,
2010; for question of Georgian dialectical codes mixing in Murghuli ravine (Republic of
Turkey) .