В статье рассматривается история развития и становления текстологии в казахской
филологиии. Определены научно-теоретические проблемы казахской текстологии, цель и
задачи лингвотекстологиии, как отдельной отрасли текстологических исследовании. В
статье был сделан глубокий сравнительный анализ, начиная с текстологии устного
народного творчества, древнетюрских письменных памятников до современной казахской
литературы. Также в статье рассматривается вопросы современной текстологии, как
важнейшяя отрасль филологической науки. Виды текста: оригинал, рукописи, варианты
текстов, вырезка, черновик, чистовик, вставка и т.д., а также причины их возниконовения,
из них поиск авторского варианта. Наряду с инновационным технологическим развитием,
в статье также рассматривается необходимость исследования таких вопросов, как
авторский вариант, канонический текст, авторская позиция. Вместе с тем в статье
рассмотрены современные исследования в области текстологии и обоснована
необходимость учебника современной казахской текстологии.
Textual research is very complex and responsible creative work requiring a long time. If
earlier the textual criticism was considered as a bibliography component, then since 1917 it
became independent science. It demonstrates that problems of textual criticism are urgent and
Therefore, textual criticism is the science about the text. It determines by what historical
era what author possesses ancient texts, and makes their analysis. This science needs profound
knowledge of philology, literary criticism, history, culturologists and other social sciences.
U. Kumisbayev in the dictionary of literary terms concerning textual criticism writes: "In
the Kazakh literary criticism the textual criticism is a new science. In modern literature, there is a
need for determination of elements of this science. There is no textbook explaining the past, this,
future and specific features of textual criticism …" [1,93].
For a research of the text of the work to these, it is necessary to address works of the
Russian researchers. Meanwhile, works of the Kazakh literature have the characteristics,
whichcannot be analyzed, relying on Russian-language scientific research. With respect, thereto
the modern Kazakh textual criticism needs a special monographic research today.
The textual criticism purpose is a comparison of versions of the work of art and detection
of the initial text for the publication. Any work has two methods of the edition: the first method
is the text is addressed to the general reader, the second is the text intends for scientific research.
There is still the third method is the adapted edition of the text for children. The text intended for
children's reading can be exposed to various reducing and changes. However, in scientific
literature there are opinions contradicting the above-stated point of view.
The famous textual critic B. M. Eykhenbaum considers that the modernize of language
elements of ancient texts is a violence over history. The scientist claims that obsolete words shall
be explained in special comments. S.A.Reyser notices that such approach complicates process of
reader's perception: "First, not author's, clear to general public, secondly, authorship is
determined only by means of historico-literary researches and it is unknown to a wide range. In
that case the first option" is initial [2,85].
This statement quite appropriate. Therefore, versions of texts can differ among themselves.
Only those words, which are unclear to the general reader,shall be commented. They shall be
commented on the same page in the form of a footnote. Sometimes the text can be published
without textual analysis. The texts intended to a wide range of readers shall be published
whenever possible after the textual research.
Long time the textual criticism was called "applied philology" and was considered as
practical discipline. There was a time when the textual criticism was considered as "craft", and
the textual analysis of the literary work – "art". Actually, textual criticism is the science directed
to the textual analysis of the art text.
The textual critic investigates not only history of creation of the work, but also reveals a
difference between hand-written options and by that learns a historical era, literary process,
ethnic language, a political and cultural situation, and also the manuscript purpose. From this
point of view, the textual criticism is closely connected with other scientific branches. Changes
of the text are connected with textual criticism. Therefore, philology is not auxiliary discipline,
opposite the primary branch having the history of development since folklore to modern
literature of present time.
B. V. Tomashevsky, B. M. Eykhenbaum are prominent representatives of the Russian
philology who have studied written sources of Old Russian literature of X-XV ІІ centuries and
the work of classics and have written a number of theoretical works. Such scientists,
as:L.D.Okulskaya, I. G. Lorionova, M. V. Bezradny, V. A. Zapodov have written masters,
doctoral dissertations. The textual criticism is one of fundamental theoretical branches of the
Russian philology with the developed methodological base. The set of dissertations in which not
only literary, but also linguistic specifics of written monuments are investigated is defended.
The textual criticism has gained broad development in philological science of the Turkic
people, namely, the Uzbek, Azerbaijani, Turkmen philology. In particular, ancient literary
monuments were long since object of fixed studying. Theoretical basics of textual criticism are
covered in the following works: P. Shamsiyev "Scientific – critical text of Hamzanova"
(Tashkent, 1970zh); "Scientific and critical text of the poem Bottoms of "Hosrovishyryn" (Baku,
1960zh); Dodalishayev D. Zh. "Poem "Haft and Monzar" of Hatyfy and her nauchno-kriti-
chesky text" (Dushanbe, 1974zh); "Textual research of Kitaby-dede-Korkut" (Baku, 1985zh).
Researchers with special awe treat the ancient literary heritage of ancestors.
In a number of master's, doctoral dissertations various options of ancient literary
monuments are compared. For example: Rashidova M. H. "Textual research of the work of
AlisherNovai "NazmulJawahir" (AKD, Tashkent, 1991zh); Rugiya G. K. "Preparation of the
scientific text, textual research and commenting of work of Fridun-Beck Kocharli", (AKD, Baku,
1981zh); Galyautdinov I. G. "Tarikh-Nome and Bulgar" TadzhetdinaYalsygulova/linguistic
textual analysis of lists of a monument. Phonologic interpretation of graphics, morphology
(AKD, Moscow, 1977.), etc.
However the Doctor of Philology, professor Mr. Anes [3,11] for the first time expressed
opinion that sources of the Kazakh textual criticism are covered in Ch. Valikhanov's works. M.
Auyezov researching creativity of Abay paid attention and to the textual analysis of works of the
great poet. In numerous literary researches comparison of versions of texts, to identification of
history of creation, detection of authorship and in general textual researches of an aytys of
Birzhan-Sar, models of folklore, and also I. Altynsarin, Ch. Valikhanov, M. Seralin, S.
Toraygyrov's works was carried out. In 1950 years on pages of periodicals, there was a rough
polemic about textual researches of creativity of Abay, models of folklore, works of the akyns-
zhyrau who are written down in oral execution or published in a seal, to versions of fairy tales
and liro-epic legends. In this plan it is possible to call articles: Z.Akhmetov, I. Dyusenbayev
"Some questions of textual studying of works of Abay" (the AN Bulletin KAZSSR, 1953, No.
10), B. Kenzhebayev "About the last publication of works of Abay" (Sotsialist_kҚазақстан,
1955, on May 29); K. Omiraliyev "Once again about textual criticism of Abay" (The Kazakh
literature, 1957, on March 8); M. Sarsekeev "About textual criticism of works of Abay"
(Literature and art, 1956zh No. 10). As a result of numerous researches in 1963 in case of
institute of Literature and art of M. Auezov of AN KAZSSR was created department "Textual
criticism and manuscripts".
Over 60 articles devoted to the textual analysis of works of Abay were at that time written.
On December 21, 1979 on pages of the KazakhskayaLiteraturanewspaper, T. Abdrakhmanov's
article the "Forever young heritage" testimonial of relevance of a textual research of creativity of
Abaywas published. The textual critic of the innovative researches Tourist's Son Zhurtbay stated
valuable judgments of rather textual analysis of works of Abay on pages of the Egemen
aza stan newspaper in the articles "Who Told Better, than Abay?" (On September 13, 2005,
and 2006) whether "Do we correctly read Abay?" (On February 22, 2006). In particular, poems
of Abay in which the relation of the poet to creativity Bukhara is expressed to a zhyra,
Shortanbaya and Dulata, are truly treated only now by the reader.
In K. Mukhametzhanov's articles "Bukhar to a zhyra" (Kazakh Literature, 1982, on June
30); N. Kelimbetova "If to tell about poetry a zhyraa" (Kazakh Literature 1982, on March 12); K.
Omiraliyeva "Yes, deep studying is necessary" (Kazakh Literature, 1971, on December 29)
issues of determination of initial version of the work are touched.
In the Kazakh textual criticism a specific place is held by works of M. Myrzakhmetov,
Z.Akhmetov, I. D ysenbayev, B. Kenzhebayev, G. Musabayev, T. Abdrakhmanov, K.
Omiraliyev, Sh. Sarybayev, A. Kuryszhanov, R. Syzdykova, B. Sagyndykov, E. Zhubanov, M.
Malbakov and other scientists who prepared ancient literary monuments and hand-written
heritage of classics for the edition.
Works of textual critics were published on pages of periodicals, collections of scientific
works, and in the form of separate monographic editions. These are H.Suyunshaliyev's works
"Words of edification of Abay" (Almaty, 1956); K. Mukhametzhanova "About textual criticism
of works of Abay" (Almaty, 1956); M. Myrzakhmetova "M. Auyezov and Abaystuding"
(Almaty, 1982); "Ancient Turkic written monuments" (Almaty, 1983); "The Kazakh folklore and
textual research of literary works" (Almaty, 1983); A. Kuryshzhanova and B. Sagyndykov "Gift
of the truth of Ahmet Iyeguneki" (Almaty, 1985); E.Zhubanova and M. Malbakov "Textual
criticism of the epos "Goat Korpesh — the Bayan Sulu" (Almaty, 1994), etc.
In the Kazakh philology the theoretical fundamentals of textual criticism are not studied
yet, however the practical textual criticism found broad application. It it is possible to see on the
example of preparation for the edition of creativity a zhyrau and akyns of ХV– ХІХ centuries.
The vast majority of scientific research of ancient and medieval literature is result of very
responsible work of scientists in respect of textual comparisons.
In A. Kuryshzhanov's work "A research on lexicon of an old kypchaks written monument
of X ІІІ centuries - "Turkic – the Arab dictionary", left in 1970, are provided results of the
linguistic textual analysis. Kuryshzhanov notes a big role of T. Hautsman adjusting the first
edition of the above-stated dictionary. At the same time, the researcher in detail stops also on the
reasons of defects in interpretation of some words: 1) because letters, 2) the wrong reading
because of conventional signs were erased [4,7]. The researcher Kuryshzhanov divided into four
groups of the word concerning a transcription problem in the Dictionary and determined the
reasons of difficulties. In this work graphical, transcriptic, phonetic word meaning is adjusted
and is proved from the scientific point of view. At the same time in E.Zhubanov and M.
Malbakov'swork "The textual criticism of the epos "KozyKorpesh-Bayan Sulu" is proved and
commented each detail expressing a difference between several versions of texts .
Depending on a kind of the work and from specifics of the analysis of the work of art
spheres of textual criticism and a linguistic textual differ. Concerning a research object in a
lingvotekstologiya differentiate: a) linguistic textual of models of folklore; b) linguistic textual of
literature of the ancient period; c) linguistic textual of modern literature.
The purposes and problems of science "Textual criticism" are connected with stages of
history of literature (folklore, literature of the ancient period and modern literature) and have the
- If works of modern literature have the hand-written options, works of ancient literature
have only the rewritten secondary option. In addition, performing folklore is written down only
from lips of performers. In this regard, the scientist-textual critic is obliged to bring into the
necessary form option, the closest to the original;
- The second distinctive feature of works of ancient literature – the indication of a
pseudonym of the author. It occurs also in works of modern literature. However, it is possible to
find the information about the author always. The author of works of ancient literature can
sometimes remain the unknown person. In that case, the textual critic is obliged to reveal the
author, having studied style and having executed a printing research;
- Time of writing of an ancient literary monument can be the unknown. The textual critic is
obliged to define time of creation of the art text.
- If copies of works of ancient literature are not numerous or have no full text, it is
impossible to recreate the original. Meanwhile a main goal of modern textual criticism is
formation of the initial text. If to consider the above-stated works of scientists-textual critics, it is
possible to notice that the sufficient attention still is not paid to linguistic textual problems.
Actually, relevance of this problem became indisputable even from the moment of emergence of
textual criticism as sciences. The academician D.S.Likhachev claims: "Right reading of the text
is guarantee of profound knowledge about era language. Unfortunately, the mistakes made in
modern editions and researches because of incorrect reading of the text, in many cases are
connected with weak knowledge of language of an era" [6,102].
RabigaSyzdykov's scientist, made a big contribution to studying of the Kazakh literary
language, notices: "... not only literary critics, and first of all linguists have to deal with problems
of textual criticism. It is caused by the fact that process of a research of the literary language and
language of fiction is closely connected with problems of the analysis of the text and definition
of his author. It is especially significant for the Kazakh philology. In samples, oral national
creativity is great variety of words Arab-Persian, тюркскго origins, and also the Mongolian
words, unclear to the modern reader. Most of people, in particular young readers do not
understand their value. Also the publisher cannot always comment on similar words. Only the
researcher the linguist can explain values of foreign-language words. The real textual critic has
to be first, difficultly the literary critic, but also the historian of literature, secondly, to know
social history, and thirdly, he has to be well informed in the field of linguistics" [7,3].
On pages of periodicals, issues of a linguistic textual have been for the first time touched in
Sh. Sarybayev and A. Kuryshzhanov's article "Textual criticism of national legends". Any legend
can have several options, whichcan be written down from lips of performers. The difference
between such options is natural. Some differences can be to the detriment of contents of the
legend. Therefore in this article it is told about need of recovery of the art contents of the legend,
keeping at the same time features of outdated language [8,21].
K. Omiraliyev in the article "Textual Criticism Oguz-kagans Monuments" writes about the
purposes of textual science: "... the textual criticism considers a subject and composite structure
of the text, sentence structure, emergence of written monuments, emergence of steady words
(formulas), preservation or destruction of traditions, distinctions of sound and grammatical forms
and another" [9,69]. Distinctive features between the rewritten options were investigated from
the point of view of phonetics, lexicon, and syntax. This article of the scientist is the valuable
scientific work written on a joint of linguistics and literary criticism
KaiymMukhamadkanov investigating textual criticism of works of Abay notices: "The
literary work which has become a spiritual treasury of the people and got a response in the
reader's soul has to be deprived of shortcomings. It is a problem of the public importance"
[10,51]. There is a set of the reasons of change of primary text:
1. Because of a carelessness when typing (technical typographical errors);
2. Mistakes of the proofreader and editor;
3. The mistakes made by the author.
Undoubtedly, all this promotes decline in quality of contents of the text. Therefore, the
purpose of literature-textual critics is a definition of initial version of the literary text,
identification of historical roots unclear to the reader of words. Therefore, the textual criticism as
a part of literary criticism has the tasks.
We do not pay sufficient attention to scientific research of the text prepared for reprinting.
In this regard in the republished texts the mistakes made in early editions aren't corrected.The
person analyzing text depths is similar to the hunter pursuing production. The expert dealing
with problems of textual criticism corrects appreciable errors in the text, and solves the
contradictory moments arising during the analysis.
One of theoretical problems of modern Kazakh textual criticism is the types of the text,
versions of the text, a kind of manuscripts, etc. Certainly, they differ from each other. Despite
amount of distinctive features, their existence is important for textual criticism. The Doctor of
Philology, professor B. Azibayeva concerning this theoretical problem writes: "the text of the
work which is written down from the performer's lips through the certain time, versions of texts
of the work which are written down from lips of several performers the texts of the known work
which are written down in different corners of the country, the modified texts of the known work
which are written down from lips of pupils of the author-storyteller, etc. are considered as
versions of this work" [12, 26].
Existence of a large number of versions of the text can deprive textual science of concrete
contents therefore the textual criticism purpose is identification of initial option and promoting to
his general reader. It does not mean that the textual critic seeks to erase other versions of the text
from national memory. In the solution of the called bike problem I. Duysenbayev's merit. About
it, the researcher A. U. Akhan notices: "I. Duysenbayev compares two versions of the text, but
doesn't call which of them is initial. It is quite fair as each option has the right for independent
existence. Only in one case of a line can be changed: if the word, a line or the stanza are
senseless, unclear to the reader, in that case it is necessary to correct logically such line, leaning
on the available other versions of the text. The author of article considers what needs to be
written down "as hear". The principle of record of heard is important both for folklore, and for
textual criticism" [12,21].
That circumstance that now much attention is paid to problems of textual criticism pleases.
Not only articles, collections, but also theses are published. Namely works: M. Imasheva "The
reality truth in Birzhan Sara's aytys and its art decision", 1992; G. Ubaydullayeva "Textual
criticism of a written monument of Horezmi. To Makhabbat-nama (ХІV s) (a source ratio to
Kazakh)", 2001. [12,21]; A. Bolsynbayeva "M. Auezov. Story of
Karash-Karash", 2004; G.
Rakhimbayeva "Historical legends of East Kazakhstan", 2005, etc.
M. Zharmukhametov in the forward to the book "Textual research of the Kazakh folklore
and literary works" (Almaty, 1983) writes: "Of course, it is impossible to claim what in 60 years
of fruitful development of our literature hasn't been written any work on textual criticism". The
scientist analyzes scientific articles of different years and concludes that in them theoretical and
practical aspects of problems of textual criticism are comprehensively affected.
Thus, all above-named scientific articles and researches concern different aspects of textual
science. Time of systematization of views of scientists in the sphere of modern Kazakh textual
criticism has in that case come.
1. Dictionary of terms of literature. – Almaty: Zhazusha, 1998. – 259 p.; 21 см.; ISBN 5-
7975-0223-2: 1000 экз.
2. S. A. Paleografiya's racer and textual criticism. – Moscow: Education, 1970. – 336 p.
60х90; ISBN 977-101-7174-51-4: 2000 экз.
3. Anes G. Linguistic textual of MakhambetUtemisov's work, abstract candidate theses.-
Almaty, 2002. – 114 p.: 60х90; ISBN 978-601-7174-51-4: 11000 экз.
4. Kuryshzhanov A. K. Research on lexicon of an old Kypchac written monument of the
13th century. "The Turkic-Arab dictionary". – Alma-Ata: Science, 1970. –234 p.: 60х90; ISBN
5-9701-7274-4: 15000 экз.
5. Zhubanov E., Malbakov M. Textual criticism of the lyrical epic poem "KozyK orpesh
— the Bayan Sulu" – Almaty: Gylym, 1987. – 223 р.; ISBN 5-8881-6243-4: 1000 экз.
6. Likhachev D. S. Textual criticism on material of the Russian literature H-H Sh of
centuries the second prod. – Leningrad: Science, 1983. – 235 p.: 60х90; ISBN 978-601-7174-51-
4: 2000 экз.
7. Syzdykova R. Textual criticism problems//Kazakh literature,1964. - N. 9 – p.4
8. Kuryshzhanov A., Sarybayev Sh. About textual criticism of national eposes//News of
Academy Kaz of SSR. Series language and literature, 1959. - N. 9. – p.19-25.
9. Umiraliyev K. Textual criticism of a written monument Oguz-Kagan. Researches of Old
Turk written monument – Almaty: Gylym, 1983. – 72 p.: 60х90; ISBN 5-7272-9146-3: 2000
10. Mukhamedkhanov K. Textual criticism work of Abay. – Almaty: Zhazusha, 1959. - 125
p.: 60х90; ISBN 5-6492-1385-7: 1000 экз.
11. Ubaydullayeva G. Zh. "Textual criticism of a written monument of Horezmi. To
Makhabbat-nama (XIV s.) (a source ratio to Kazakh)". – Almaty, the Abstract candidate theses,
2001 – 28 p.; 60х90. - ISBN 5-7461-2382-4: 10000 экз.
12. A.U's Akan. "The epos of Korugla in R. Mazkhozhayev's execution (a plot and textual
criticism)". – Almaty: the Abstract candidate theses, 2010 – 32 p.: 22 см.; ISBN 978-7174-5110-