Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Studying the historical roots of the Uzbek literary language and its place in state and social life is necessary for scholarly grounding of present-day language policy. The Timurid period (1370-1507) is especially relevant, since Turkic then rose from a dynastic and military language to a classical literary language. The period’s language situation has mostly been studied from a literary perspective, leaving language policy insufficiently explored. The article analyses the status of Turkic alongside Arabic and Persian and court language practice. The study draws on chronicles, inscriptions, manuscripts copied by bakhshis, yarliqs and letters, and data on madrasa education. It shows that Arabic served religion and genealogy, Persian served the chancery and monumental inscriptions, and Turkic was the language of the dynasty, the army, yarliqs and the bakhshis’ book culture. In the fifteenth century Turkic became a literary language through court patronage, a process theorised in the treatise “Muhakamat al-lughatayn”.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zokir Maxmudovich Baynazarov (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: