Talk:Azerbaijani language/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

North vs South Azerbaijani

Gents,

I find this part of article a bit strange it has statement below saying that South and North Azerbaijani has significant difference. However, when it compares North Azerbaijani and Turkey Turkish the statement says that "Historically, Azerbaijani and Turkish speakers have been able to communicate with relative ease".

As being native speaker of this language and also having relatives and friends from South Azerbaijan. I would like mention that this statement is not true. South Azerbaijani and North Azerbaijani people understands each other much more easily than they do with Turkey turks. Unfortunately, the sentence mentioned in wikipedia trying state that North Azerbaijani and Turkey Turkish much more closer and mutually understood during conversation than South Azerbaijani which is not true. It is like saying United State's English is significantly different from Canadian and British English. Canadian and British people easily understand each other, however having difficulty understanding United State's English.

I would like to see references to this statement and ask author to justify. Otherwise I would like to change it to reflect truth.

Looking forward for discussion.

Regards,

Mirhasanov (talk) 09:23, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Below information was added and the information was stating both language are significantly different was deleted.

Despite the fact that North Azerbaijanians were under Russian Empire and South Azerbaijan is part of Iran, Azeris on both sides managed to keep their language alive. As for the difference between them, it is certain that Russian and Iranian words, respectively, have entered the vocabulary on either sides of the Araz river, but this has not occurred to an extend that it could pose difficulties for communication .

Mirhasanov (talk) 15:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Mirhasanov, as I noted on your talk page, the above text is a close paraphrase of the cited source, and as such is a copyright violation. It has been changed to an attributed quotation in the article. I'm just noting that to give attribution here.

I've restored the quotation that you removed in this edit: "Information about North and South Azerbaijan language is significantly different was deleted and updated with sourced information saying there is not big difference...". The quotation about "significant differences" was sourced to Ethnologue, maybe you didn't see that because the link wasn't working? I've added archive links now. In general you shouldn't delete information from one source and replace it with information that says the opposite thing from another source, if they are both reliable sources. If reliable sources of equal prominence disagree, then both sides should be explained or otherwise reconciled. Please see WP:NPOV, especially:

Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. The relative prominence of each viewpoint among Wikipedia editors or the general public is not relevant and should not be considered. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views.

Also, you wrote: the sentence mentioned in wikipedia trying state that North Azerbaijani and Turkey Turkish much more closer and mutually understood during conversation than South Azerbaijani. The article did not say that. It noted that there are some significant differences between North Azerbaijani and South Azerbaijani, but never said that they were more significant than between Azerbaijani and Turkish. It's clear that's not the case, though it's true that "significant" is somewhat vague, and could be misinterpreted. The changes by IP 2601:410:280:a90:617e:3e12:4a3f:75d9 and by you have made that more clear, so thank-you for that. --IamNotU (talk) 21:43, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

References

IamNotU,

Thank you very much for making my notes better and aligned with Wikipedia standards. As I am new your help is highly appreciated and really helpful. It is fine now, I was able to open link and see the information. Thanks for correcting it. I am native speaker of this language, even thought I don't see ay difference in phonology, lexicon, if enthnologue says it is I can't argue as I am not linguist.

Sincerely,

Mirhasanov (talk) 21:56, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Azerbaijani language is a language

I've reverted the recent edit that changed mentions of "lects" to "languages", and mentions of the Azerbaijani language to a "macrolanguage" or "the two languages" etc.: [1]. A similar edit was made by the same editor here: [2].

I've also changed the lead sentence from "Azerbaijani ... is a term referring to two Turkic lects (North Azerbaijani and South Azerbaijani) that are spoken primarily by the Azerbaijanis" to "Azerbaijani ... is a Turkic language spoken primarily by the Azerbaijanis". This is in accordance with MOS:LEADSENTENCE (see also WP:ISATERMFOR and WP:REFERSTO). We must say what the subject of the article actually is, and the obvious answer is that "Azerbaijani language" is a language.

It's true that the Ethnologue/ISO classification system calls it a "macrolanguage", but that isn't a good reason for the Wikipedia article to avoid calling it a language. "Macrolanguage" is a term not widely used in lingustics outside of these classification systems. It does not mean that something classified as such is not a language; Ethnologue specifically says: "The individual languages that comprise a macrolanguage must be closely related, and there must be some context in which they are commonly viewed as comprising a single language." [3].

I also don't believe that the classification codes are reliable sources for determining if there is a broad agreement among experts about whether two language varieties are dialects or separate languages, and this is even supported by Ethnologue itself (see previous link). For example, Arabic is also called a "macrolanguage" in the Ethnologue system, but the lead sentence of its Wikipedia article begins: "Arabic is a Semitic language..." The same is true for the Azerbaijani language, and "Azerbaijani is a Turkic language..." is appropriate. This is particularly true since the two varieties of Azerbaijani are far more similar than some of the varieties of Arabic which are mutually unintelligible and thus argued by a few to be separate languages.

There is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes a language vs. a dialect (see Dialect § Dialect or language), but the main criterion is mutual intelligibility. Describing them as "separate languages" is surprising to readers if we also say that all speakers can easily understand each other. On the other hand, the fact that they use different writing systems for example could be reason to argue that they should be considered languages rather than dialects, although we would need citations for that, which I haven't found. Linguists commonly use the term variety (or lect) which avoids having to make arbitrary distinctions.

Ethnologue/ISO 639 similarly has individual language codes for different varieties of Arabic. But to conclude only from this that, for example, the North and South varieties of Levantine Arabic, even though they are both labelled as "a language" by Ethnologue, are actually "two separate languages" would be highly misleading. We would need reliable sources showing that linguists generally agree that these two varieties are so different from each other as to be considered separate languages - and that does not exist, because they are not. Regardless of how they are slotted into Ethnologue's system, they are very similar and the word dialect or variety is normally used for them in the literature, and in the Wikipedia article.

The real test, as always, is "what do the most reliable sources say about 'Azerbaijani language'?". One of the most authoritative is the Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics cited in the lead. It has only one entry for the language, which begins: "Azerbaijanian (Azerbaijani, Azeri) (Azerbaycan dili, Azerbaycanca) belongs, like Turkish, to the western group of the southwestern, or Oghuz, branch of the Turkic language family. It is spoken in northern and southern Azerbaijan (i.e., in the Republic of Azerbaijan), particularly in the province of Azerbaijan, and in Iran." It consistently refers to Azerbaijani as "the language", and repeatedly calls the northern and southern forms "varieties". Even if North and South Azerbaijani could arguably be called "languages" by some definition, it does not follow that "Azerbaijani language" should never be called "a language", but only a "macrolanguage", "a term referring to two languages", etc. This is not how it's done in other encyclopedias and language books, and doing so in this article does not adhere to WP:NPOV.

It's ok to mention how Ethnologue etc. classifies things, or to quote it saying there are differences between the varieties. But it's not ok to extrapolate from this that there's no such thing as the "Azerbaijani language". It is considered one of the Turkic languages, alongside modern Turkish, Turkmen, etc., and is widely discussed and accepted as such in the majority of reliable sources on the subject. --IamNotU (talk) 05:09, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

IamNotU (talk),

My friend hats off to this brilliant explanation. I read every single sentences that you wrote and it clearly shows how well you did your research and justified important points which were subject to dispute. Even writing this kind of text takes a long time so, thank you very much for your good will and time invested to produce this healthy argumentation.

Mirhasanov (talk) 07:06, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Turkish vs. Turkic

Dear all,

recently the English Wikipedia users changed all of the instances of the word "Turkish" to "Turkic". The distinction between the two terms only existed in Russian before (this was politically motivated - one can present numerous citations regarding this matter). I find it extremely peculiar to try and translate this etimology into Western languages. For instance, some Azerbaijani-speaking users have tried to change "Türkisch" to "Turkisch" in the German version of this page in order to artificially create the distinction between the two concepts. Sadly, this sounds extremely ridiculous in German, for the reasons that such word simply does not exist in the respective language. With the help of the Russian-speaking users, the word "Turkic" found its way into the English by now. I hope, however, that our community decides to pull back this naming. Even if one does insist on using this terminology, it is imperative to at least mention that the distinction between "Turkic" and "Turkish" does not exist in Azerbaijani itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qara159 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

The word "Turkic" has existed in English for a long time (certainly predating Wikipedia), as a reference to languages and ethnic groups related to, but not necessarily part of, Turkey or the Turkish language. You're simply not going to get English speakers, when discussing non-Turkish people or languages, to stop using "Turkic" and start using "Turkish" instead. And even if a distinction between these two English words doesn't exist in the Azerbaijani language, that isn't germane to whether the two words are distinct in English — though I will concede that a discussion of the lack of this distinction might possibly be relevant in the narrow context of a discussion about whether Azerbaijani is a dialect of Turkish or a separate language. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 23:25, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the word Turkic is widely used in reliable English sources when talking about language families. Wikipedia will continue to describe Azerbaijani as "a Turkic language" for example. On the other hand, there is mixed usage of e.g. "Azerbaijani Turkish" and "Azerbaijani Turkic" in reliable sources (Google books search) to refer to the language. The former gets about ten times more general Google hits, though that's not conclusive. I don't think that edits like this: [4], where several instances of "Turkish" were replaced with "Turkic", are necessarily correct or helpful. I reverted the last replacement because it changed a direct quote. I'm not sure what to do about the rest. --IamNotU (talk) 02:51, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Names in lead sentence

I've restored the actual terms found in the cited sources in the lead sentence, "Azeri Turkic" and "Azeri Turkish" rather than "Azerbaijani Turkic" and "Azerbaijani Turkish". However, in a Google books search, I did find examples of both of the latter. I don't think that all variations should be crammed into the first sentence: Azerbaijani, Azeri, Azerbaijani Turkish, Azerbaijani Turkic, Azeri Turkish, Azeri Turkic, and another one that is often found: Azerbaijanian. Only the most common two or three should be listed, see MOS:ALTNAME and MOS:LEADCLUTTER. If it's necessary to mention the others, it can be done in another part. Citations that only give an example of one or another being used in a book are not very helpful in determining how common they are. It should be based on reliable sources that discuss the language and the common alternative names.

Although not necessarily referring to the language specifically, a Google ngrams search shows Azerbaijani and Azeri being by far the most common, followed by Azerbaijanian, with the rest having few or no occurences. A regular Google search shows for example very few results for the "Turkic" variations. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics notes Azerbaijanian, Azerbaijani, and Azeri only. --IamNotU (talk) 03:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

North Azerbaijani vowels — still no source added

I still insist that we need a North Azerbaijani source with all tested speakers born after dissolution of USSR. Erkin Alp Güney 16:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC) bumped Erkin Alp Güney 14:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

This south and north Azerbaijani

I find terms of south and north Azerbaijani as political terms.(biased) there is no such a term as South Azerbaijan or north Azerbaijan.you can say republic of Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan of Iran.(Azerbaijan province) it’s like calling Nigeria as south France.just because the language that they have are same.(even though in this article they are are not even same).these sources Ethnologue specifically, they are very strongly biased toward considering what many people would consider as dialects as distinct languages. Simsala111 (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

No, it is not. Tell that to Glottolog. Beshogur (talk) 08:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Requesting opinion on a page move request.

Hello,

@ Talk:Aurat (disambiguation)#Requested_move_11_May_2020 is taking place about article relating to women of mainly of Asian origin. In Past 2 days only two opinions are received and more opinions will be preferable. Thanks for your opinion and participation in discussion.

Bookku (talk) 12:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurat (word)

The terms "Aurat", "Arvad", "Avret", and "Awrath" may refer to: Women of Asian religious or cultural descent and identity.

Self nomination for AFD since article copy pasted to Draft:Aurat for incubation because IMHO current article title Aurat (word) is misleading and confusing leading to western systemic bias and stifling the article growth. Please find Detail reason at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurat (word)

I invite project members to review current and potential sourcing and weigh in on the AfD discussion. Thanks! Bookku (talk) 02:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Requesting small help

Hello many greetings,

Requesting your proactive contribution and support in updating Draft:Aurats (word) in relation to the related languages you know well.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 03:22, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

How are North Azerbaijani and South Azerbaijani not on different pages?

Please explain how North Azerbaijani and South Azerbaijani are not separate pages? These are two different languages whose communities, despite sharing a common border, have very little social, cultural or economic contact and have been politically divided for over 200 years. The idea that South Azerbaijani speakers can understand North Azerbaijani is just pure fiction. North Azerbaijani dialects are significantly different from those spoken in Iran in the same way that Catalan is significantly different from Spanish, Scots from English or Danish from Swedish. Sure, they might understand 50-70% of what the other person is saying but in Europe those are called different Languages but on a Wikipedia page about Asian languages they're just lumped together. What's even more absurd is the fact that we've already classified them as two languages on Wikipedia! I understand than the Azerbaijani government would like to promote Pan Turkism and likely claim some power over the majority of Azeris who actually don't even live in Azerbaijan but instead in Iran but Wikipedia is not the place for making that argument.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Monopoly31121993(2): They are same language but different dialects/varieties. Do you have any reliable source for your claim? --Wario-Man (talk) 15:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

On Ethnologue, two different languages are mentioned : North [5] and south [6], but as far as i can see, they seem to be considered as dialects of the macro-language "Azerbaijani".---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Ethnologue does not pass as a reliable source for language classification. It's just a collection of world languages. --Wario-Man (talk) 15:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

So, given that no other source supports a "two distinct languages claim" (if i'm not mistaken), i think that the article is ok.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

this page shows a variety of sources.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 15:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

That's a userpage and there is nothing special about that page. This article is OK. Both North Azerbaijani and South Azerbaijani redirect to this article. Your claim needs some linguistic sources written by some experts. Also American English and British English have their own articles but both are just English language not two different languages. If you have some reliable sources, just expand this article. --Wario-Man (talk) 16:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that it's very unfair that a "language" like American English would be given it's own page but Asian languages like North and South Azerbaijani are lumped together. I don't see how expanding this article and not breaking it up into two is the answer.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 16:13, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm baffled how "they are the same languages" can be used as an excuse for South Azerbaijani not having its own article. I don't want to violate WP:OTHERSTUFF, but Cypriot Turkish, English English, American English among others having their own pages, yet SA with its own ISO code and reliable sources not existing doesn't make any sense. I have just recently started the article in my homewiki. Any notable subject according to WP guidelines can have its own article. It's classification is utterly irrelevant. --89.245.131.94 (talk) 11:37, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

You can definitely create a separate article for it if you have a lot of sources and material to write an article about it. If you want, you can try to create it in your sandbox first and then we can help you with it. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 12:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Actually what you said is irrelevant stuff and has nothing to with this discussion. You didn't get the point of this discussion. Read it again. Who said a dialect or variety can't have its own article?! English Wikipedia is full of them. Even I myself mentioned American and British English with their own wikilinks in one of my above comments. This discussion is about if A = B or if A =/= B. You want to create an article and you think it's notable? Then go create it. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Kardeş means sibling, not brother

The table in the Azerbaijani vs. Turkish section says that the Turkish word "kardeş" means "brother," but it doesn't. It means "sibling." To specify a brother or sister, you have to say "erkek kardeş" ("male sibling") or "kız kardeş" ("girl sibling"). Turkish only has gender-specific words for elder brothers and sisters ("abi" and "abla"). I think this row should be deleted, since the words in it don't "mean the same thing in both languages" as stated above the table. We could probably change "brother" to "sibling," but according to Wiktionary, that's an archaic definition of "qardaş." Metrowestjp (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

comparative linguistics

A455bcd9, Hello! I added this information in August 2019. The fact is that then I did not take into account the place of publication. The site says that this is a transcript of a lecture by Oleg Mudrak, read on April 16, 2009 at the Bilingua literary cafe club within the framework of the Polit.ru Public Lectures project. Please provide similar information published in a scientific source. If the data is valid, this should not be a problem. V.N.Ali, 11:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by V.N.Ali (talk • contribs)

Why hasn't Oleg Mudrak made a scientific article with this information for more than 10 years, didn't publish it in a scientific publishing house? Or published it? .. In this case, it is necessary to find and add, but in this form it raises doubts. V.N.Ali (talk) 14:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

"Azerbaijani Turkic"

Can anyone provide the quote by Christriane Bulut. Doesn't seem like a proper name. Beshogur (talk) 18:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Beshogur, I searched through the book but I can't find "Azerbaijani Turkic". The closest thing I could find was "Azerbaijanian-Turkish" (author wrongly refers to language as Azerbaijanian throughout the book) on page 230. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 07:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@CuriousGolden: I think we have to remove it then. It doesn´t look like a proper name. Beshogur (talk) 11:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

North and South?

The standard forms are Shirvani (Republic of Azerbaijan) and Tabrizi (Azerbaijan).

Referring to Shirvani Turkish as "North Azerbaijani" and Tabrizi as "South Azerbaijani" is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sickofthisbs (talk • contribs) 22:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Friendly reminder that the Perso-Arabic used for Azerbaijani Turkish is not a strict abjad and represents all vowels except for "Ə" which is the only unwritten vowel.

https://mohser.blogsky.com/tag/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%A8%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%A2%D8%B0%D8%B1%DB%8C

A quick stroll through the Southern Azerbaijani Turkish language Wikipedia will make this quickly very apparent. As is a cursory glance through any material published in Southern Azerbaijani Turkish. Please refrain from claiming it does not represent any vowels when it very clearly does.

Dimashlar (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2021 (UTC)Dimashlar

Blogs are not reliable sources. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:55, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I am dismayed that you have made no attempt to engage with the sources I actually included in my edit on the article page. For your convenience and for the convenience of others viewing this page, I have included two of my sources below.

Both of the following sources are primary sources that are written in Southern Azerbaijani as is spoken and written in Iran.

This is a primary source, the state broadcaster of the Turkish Government's news site in the Southern Azerbaijani language. This shows full vowels written in.

This is another primary source of written Southern Azerbaijani written by a private news site.

Both have them are included in the inline citation in my edit. Your edit has unfortunately been completely unsourced and you have provided no primary, or secondary sources.

Dimashlar (talk) 15:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)Dimashlar

That's not even a primary source, see wp:or. I don't even discuss what you've changed, the edit is problematic. Beshogur (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

both are examples of the script being used by real people and organizations. But if that's not good enough for you I have the original alphabet manual from the creator of Southern Azerbaijan's Modern alphabet itself. http://www.azeri.org/Azeri/az_arabic/azturk_standard.pdf . Dr. Javad Hayat, who is a "recognized expert on Turkic matters" wrote this manual detailing the Perso-Arabic alphabet's usage, including its vowels. His Wikipedia page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javad_Heyat#CITEREFRiaux2018

He simoultaneously wrote several books on the history of and language of Iran's historic Azerbaijan region.[1] In 1983, Heyat briefly moved to the United States in order to participate in the first Conference of Turkic studies at the University of Indiana.[1] There, Heyat presented a paper which dealt with the Azeri Turkish language, before and after the Revolution.[1] Heyat was the recipient of numerous honorary degrees from universities in Turkey and the Republic of Azerbaijan: University of Medicine in Istanbul, Medical School of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Turkish Language Academy in Ankara, Academy of the Republic of Azerbaijan.[1] He also was Ayatollah Khamenei's personal physician when the latter was President of Iran.[1]

I will be overriding your unsourced claims with the material that Dr. Javad Hayat outlines in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimashlar (talk • contribs) 17:14, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Azerbaijani language

In Azerbaijan ,people mostly use Azerbaijani language term when they describe their mother tongue. No need to call it Azerbaijani Turkish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AzeriMedGuy (talk • contribs) 11:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Turkish is an obsolete term used for Turkic peoples as well. It's not always about Turkey. So that's inscorrect. Also between 1992-95, it was called Turkish or Turkic whatever you like to say, by Elchibey's decree. Beshogur (talk) 14:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Is it "lesser varying degrees" or "varying lesser degrees"?

The current article contains:

"It is also spoken to lesser varying degrees in Azerbaijani communities of Georgia and Turkey and by diaspora communities, primarily in Europe and North America."

My internal English grammar tells me to expect "varying lesser degrees" instead of "lesser varying degrees". Am I missing something, or is my grammar right?Redav (talk) 19:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Needs converting to actual English

This was not written by a native English speaker. One classic example is the poor grasp of the definite article, e.g. 'Azerbaijani language' should be 'the Azerbaijani language' in several places. Someone should edit this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.153.6 (talk) 08:21, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello

I haven't added the first article to this wikipedia after 3 years. I guess there was a problem with the sources, sorry Azeri language (talk) 16:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Aydın memmedov2000

You tried to add them on two occassions,[7]-[8] however, they aren't WP:RS. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aydın memmedov2000. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Tonoyan & Karpat

In order to avoid any confusion regarding my edit - Karpat states the following:

In Azerbaycan, Türki, the folk language, slowly began to replace the Farsi (Persian) spoken by the upper classes. This change was supported by the Russians, who were eager to dilute the Persian influence in the Caucasus.

The Tonoyan source, an excellent source that cites Karpat as its source for the sentence in question, uses the term Iranian identity to refer to the Tat (Caucasian Persian) spoken in the Absheron peninsula, not to the Iranian elements of Azerbaijani language/people as was previously implied. This is clear from the content Note 4 (which was cited in this Wiki article) was cited for:

Moreover, the Caucasian Persian was still the dominant language of the Absheron peninsula, as well as of the entire Baku province, up to the middle of the 19th century.3 The process of Turkicization resulted in the progressive spread of the Azerbaijani language, which became the so-called "titular" language and therefore gradually increased its role in the two main Turkic-Iranian language contact zones of the aforementioned region.4

— Golden ^{call me maybe?} 14:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

similarity with turkish

in table where similarities/differences are descrbied btw these languages, last 4 pre-last examples show q to k change; instead I would include some other like torpaq - toprak, yarpaq - yaprak

qan	kan	blood
qaz	kaz	goose
qaş	kaş	eyebrow
qar	kar	snow
daş	taş	stone

aruz (talk) 17:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Azerbaijani language names

@Beshogur Hi friend. About your edit in Azerbaijani turkish , I should say that according to cambridge dictionary turkish means: "belonging to or relating to Turkey, its people, or its language" [9]. Azerbaijani language is nothing to do with turkey and doesn't related to turkey and it is different and independent language, nation and country. They are both turkic language but Azerbaijani language is different language from Turkey official language Turkish. Bitim (talk) 19:16, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

It's not true. Turkish is archaic version of Turkic. Turkic is a recent word in English, which is a Soviet influence after 1940s. Beshogur (talk) 16:47, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Beshogur: first I should repeat that according to Cambridge dictionary turkish word means: "belonging to or relating to Turkey, its people, or its language"[10]. Turkish language is name of a language which is spoken in turkey[11] and it is nothing more than one member of Turkic language family as Azerbaijani language and many other languages are. Secondly, -ic is a suffix in english such like arabic, germanic, turkic and so on. It doesn't relate to soviet or other things, your words are based on Conspiracy theory and it doesn't have any scientific value. Bitim (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory yeah sure. Beshogur (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Disruptive edits on the Perso-Arabic script for Azerbaijani

Several users have been making disruptive edits regarding the usage of the Perso-Arabic script for Azerbaijani on this page. The dictionary "لغت‌نامه ترکی آذربایجانی: حروف آ (جلد" by Seyyed Hassan Ameli is a dictionary published in Iran for the Azeri Turkish language which uses the reformed version of the Perso-Arabic script that was created by Dr. Javad Heyat. as outlined in a guide he wrote here : http://www.azeri.org/Azeri/az_arabic/azturk_standard.pdf

For those that have questions, comments, or concerns about how how this alphabet works I welcome them to discuss and settle the matter here once and for all. There are ample examples of Javad Heyat's reformed Perso-Arabic vowel letters appearing in diverse forms of Azerbaijani language media in Iran. From Printed books, to digital newspapers, to social media.

information about this is well sourced, disputes and questions should be settled here instead of edit warring and removing well sourced edits on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimashlar (talk • contribs) 17:43, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Grammar?

This article should include something about the Azerbaijani grammar. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Removing "Azeri" from article

@Tural2008: You removed the mentions of "Azeri" and "Azeri Turkic" in the introduction with the comment "Azeri word is wrong". The terms are commonly used, there’s no point removing them from the article. Please indicate why the terms are inadequate in the article with references. Pretending they don’t exist or aren’t used isn’t helping anyone. Moyogo/ (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

After all, we do not officially use such an abbreviation. Our textbooks are written in Azerbaijani or the Azerbaijani language. This abbreviation is an unattested word coined later. Tural Alisoy (talk) 10:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

We need some reliable sources here, folks. It seems to me that there are quite a few sources already in this article which refer to this language as "Azeri", but I (who am a non-speaker of the language) have no way of knowing how reliable these sources are (or are not). Please, let's not descend into an edit war in which people are adding and removing the word based only on their personal knowledge or understanding; please back up your knowledge with sources. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 13:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

@Tural2008: Whether it is coined later or not or whether you used it or not, it’s used in English as a synonym for "Azerbaijani":

The Oxford dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 113 (Google Books):

Azeri /əˈzɛːri/ ▸ noun (pl. Azeris) 1 a member of a Turkic people forming the majority population of Azerbaijan, and also living in Armenia and northern Iran. 2. [mass noun] the Azerbaijani language. ▸ adjective relating to the Azeris or their language. – ORIGIN from Turkish azerî.

--Moyogo/ (talk) 18:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Yep. The word Azeri also predates the Turkic Azerbaijani language, making it even more irrelevant whether they use it or not. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

If this helps, Audrey L. Altstadt, The Azerbaijani Turks: power and identity under Russian rule, Hoover Institution Press, 1992, p. ix (Google Books):

The Turks of Azerbaijan were classified as Tatars or Muslims in the imperial period and as Turks until 1937. Thereafter, they and their language were called Azerbaijani by Soviet or “Azeri” by some Western sources. An apparently Iranian language called Azeri was spoken in Atropaten; thus, the term is inappropriate for today's Azerbaijani Turks and their language.* Some historians in Soviet Azerbaijan have suggested the most correct usage is “Azerbaijan Türkleri,” for it reflects both ethnicity and location. I have used this term, translated as Azerbaijani Turk, occasionally using only Azerbaijani or Turk for brevity. In the language of the Turks, there is no distinction between Turkish (in Russian, turetskii) and Turkic (tiurkskii). The former has been used, following Russian imperial and Soviet precedent, to refer to Turks of the Ottoman Empire or the Turkish Republic; the latter, to Turks elsewhere. Because of the artificiality of this distinction in a cultural or ethnic sense, I have used Turkish throughout.

*From Istoriia Azerbaidzhana/Azarbayjan Tarikhi (Baku, 1958-1963), 1:49.

So it seems that is one of the problems some people have with "Azeri". --Moyogo/ (talk) 06:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Or also, Sooman Noah Lee, A Grammar of Iranian Azerbaijani (thesis), University of Sussex, 1996, p. 1 (University of Sussex Library):

The Azerbaijani language is spoken by the Azerbaijani people. They are known by several names depending on the location and context, such as ‘Azeri (Azəri in Azerbaijani)’, ‘Azeri Turk (Azəri Türk)’, ‘Turk (Türk)¹’, as well as ‘Azerbaijani (Azərbaycanlı)’. These names can be used interchangeably; however, ‘Azerbaijani’ is considered the most proper. The noun ‘Azerbaijani [ɑzɛɾbɑjˈdʒɑni]’, in effect, has two meanings: ‘the Azerbaijani people’ and ‘the language spoken by the people’, though sometimes the language is called ‘the Azerbaijani language (Azərbaycan dili or Azərbaycanca)’.

¹ ‘Turk’ is an Iranian name for the Azerbaijani people and ‘Turki’ for the language.

--Moyogo/ (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)