After the creation of the Mongol Empire by Genghis Khan, there was an urgent need to spread literacy among the country's population. The history of writing and linguistics in Mongolia was shrouded in a fog of myths, apparently arising as a result of the ideology of the higher lamas of Tibetan-Mongolian Buddhism.

Tibetan Buddhism, having established itself in Mongolia, quite firmly, developed not only preaching, but also publishing, ideological activities, covering more and more widely all spheres of public life of almost all Mongolian tribes. Lamas, as propagators of the ideas of Buddhism, brought Tibetan culture and education to the great Steppe.

In this situation, there is a need to study the issues of Mongolian writing in closer cooperation with the needs of public and Buddhist confessional interests. The development of grammatology and orthography of the Mongolian language is closely related to the name of Sakya Pandita Gungazhaltsan. He wrote the grammatical work "Zurkhny tolt" ("Heart cover, or Rim of the heart") as suggested in 1237 or 1243, in which "he based the Uyghur-Mongolian alphabet on the principles of Indo-Tibetan writing, adapting 14 Uyghur characters to convey the Mongolian speech in writing" [Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 87]. It is known that the Mongols used the Uyghur alphabet long before the time of Sakya Pandita, as evidenced by the writing features of the Isungge wall inscription.

Based on the comments of Yu. N. Roerich and Ts. Damdinsuren has now established the opinion that Gungaazhaltsan " only compiled a primer and formed the basic phonetic rules of Uyghur writing, for which Gungaazhaltsan used three Mongolian non-sunken vowels: a, e, i, for which there were special signs in the Uyghur alphabet. Combining them with consonants, in accordance with Indo-Tibetan traditions, he formed the syllable letters: pa, pe, ni; va, ve, BI, ta, te, ti... Danzandagba later said that Gungaazhaltsan used the masculine a, feminine e, and neutral I to compose the primer and formed 44 syllable letters with them " (Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 88). The Uyghur-Mongolian script is sound."...According to M. N. Orlovskaya, he did not include rounded Mongolian sounds, which are transmitted by complex letters from two or three Uyghur signs, in the alphabet, limiting himself to only 44 syllable letters" (Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 4). 88]. It is known that Mongolian grammarians, blindly following the Indo-Tibetan syllabic system of writing, did not distinguish between letter, sound and syllable in their works. Thus, the basic information about the sound structure of the Middle Mongolian language is obtained with the help of competent generalizations made by M. N. Orlovskaya.

All scholars agree that Zurkhny Tolt was written by the Tibetan scholar Sakya Pandita Gungazhaltsan, a former uncle of Pagba Lama Lodojaltsan, the inventor of the Mongolian square script. Mongolian academician D. Tumurtogb (1973) believes that in this work the creator "added to 14 Uyghur letters: a, p,

page 181
b, q (k), m, I, r, s, d, t, y, c, j, as" animating"," animating "three vowels a, e, i, additionally introduced wa, we, so he got 44 letters-syllables" 2002, p. 475]. He also notes that there are no "labial vowels o, u, ö, ü, as well as their corresponding letters-syllables" in the system of letters-syllables of Gungazhaltsan . The academician tried to reveal the reason for the disappearance of the labial vowels mentioned above, concluding that: "As the history of the development of vowel sounds in the Mongolian language shows, the labial vowels o, u, ü, and exist in it from ancient times to the present day. The Sughd-Uyghur script had separate graphemes to indicate them. Some labial vowels are found in the text of the inscription on the "Genghis Stone "" p. 476].

He further believes that " meanwhile, wa, we are combined only with the vowels a,e, which probably indicates the difference between labial vowels in the main features: masculine, feminine and neutral. In the Gungajalcan alphabet, waw denotes the vowels ä/ü, the synthetic sign waw + yod denotes ä/ü, and the consonant w is denoted by beth. Gungajalcan considers labial vowels and the consonant w to be allophones. Therefore, the letters waw, beth were not independent. From this it is clear that Gungazhaltsan compiled an alphabet of 44 letters-syllables, or 16 letters-signs, capable of denoting 100 sounds... Of all the consonants, only the w sound has the property of "semi-vowel", i.e. "semi-vowel" " 2002, p. 477]. He proved this position of the sound combinations wa, we clearly in the evolution of labial vowels on the facts taken from the sources of Old Mongolian speech and square writing, which show the continuity of consonants and labial vowels in the ancient and Middle periods of the Mongolian language.

The famous translator, poet, scholar and theologian Choiji-Odser wrote a grammatical work in 1308-1311 called "Zurkhny Toltyn Tailbar", which continued the teaching about the sound system of the Mongolian language, started by Gungajaltsan.

C. Damdinsuren believed that in the scientific literature there are three treatises of the same name under the general title "Zurkhny tolt", written by Sakya Pandita Gungajaltsan (XIII c.), Choji-Odser (XIV c.), Gunga-Odser, who lived during Ligden Khan (Damdinsuren, 1957, p. 111). Mongolian academic, philologist D. Tserensodnom published the work "Mongol nomyn zurkhny tolt hemeh nert zuun naiman useg "("One hundred and eight letters under the name "Zurkhny tolt") in 2002, the author of which was Choiji-Odser himself. He had two copies of this ancient work. This discovery caused a sensation in the scientific circles of Mongolian scientists. D. Tserensodnom believes that these manuscripts were copies of the works of Choiji-Odser, copied by brush in the XVII century on thick, well-preserved paper (Tserensodnom, 2002, p. 9). They were found by lovers of hoary antiquity-rural intellectuals, who got the manuscript from the hands of the higher lamas, who kept them for a long time. These Arats, through their young men, placed their treasures in safe hands - D. Tserensodny. While publishing them, the scientist wrote a preface [ibid., p. 3-15], gave a transcription of the text with a facsimile [ibid., pp. 16-24; pp. 26-43].

Choiji-Odser's work consists of three chapters. The first one tells about the spread of Buddhism in Mongolia, as well as about the compilation of the Mongolian letter of Sakya Pandita Gangazhaltsan and the square letter of Pagba Lama Lodojaltsan. The second section provides a classification of sounds and letters, discusses the phonetics of the Mongolian language, vocabulary, syntax, stylistics, and explains the basics of spelling. Above, we have given information about the Choiji-Odser phonetic system as interpreted by M. N. Orlovskaya based on the testimony and research of modern Mongolian linguists, mainly phonetists. In the third part, he highlighted the interpretation of sounds of the Mongolian language based on elements (mahbod) taken from ancient Indian philosophy (Pagba, 1957, p. 18), and pointed out that the provisions on the phonetics of the Mongolian language set forth by Choiji-Odser later helped in phonology to reveal the sound form of human speech that has phi-

page 182
The psychological aspect (pitch, strength, timbre of sound, tone, noise, and resonance) and the biological aspect (speech organs associated with sound formation) are studied experimentally [Matusevich, 1948].

Based on the work of Ravjamba Danzandagba, published by P. B. Baldanzhapov (1962) and T. Pagba (1957), M. N. Orlovskaya presented the most reliable analysis of the phonetic system of the classical Mongolian language in the interpretation of Choiji-Odser. "Developing further the teaching of his predecessor about the sound system of the Mongolian language, Choiji-Odser adds to the three non-pronounced vowels (a, e, i) four pronounced ones (o, u, ö, ü), which undoubtedly existed in the Mongolian language itself, but for which there were no special letters in the Uyghur alphabet. The scientist formed the first two of them from the Uyghur alphabet aleph and waw, and the second from aleph, waw and yod. Just as Gungaazhaltsan, following the Indo-Tibetan sound system, now combined each consonant with seven vowels. Thus, a new Mongolian alphabet appeared, consisting of 123 syllable letters, to which the combination-ng and-iyar was added... Choiji-Odser introduced many Tibetan concepts to denote sounds and letters, as well as their distribution: egshig "vowel", giiguulegch "consonant", em "female", er "male",saarmag "neutral" sounds, he first formulated the rules of vowel harmony, which are important in the phonological system of the Mongolian language. These rules of synharmonicity, somewhat refined in subsequent works, still exist today" [Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 89]. She also considers Choiji-Odser's important discovery about debiskers, letters, and borrowings from the Tibetan language, when "some consonants are used at the end of a word without vowels, and identified 11 such consonants: n, m, l, g, y, j, d, b, s, y, w, ng" [Orlovskaya 1993, p. 89]. V. M. Nadelyaev explained the words debiskerlekü "bedding", debisker "litter" [Nadelyaev, 1972, p. 163]. M. N. Orlovskaya notes that debisker üsüg "sent letter "(finished), which are listed above, the other five: g, t, k, j, c were named non - debiskers-debisker ügei üsüg [Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 90]. This observation, as M. N. Orlovskaya notes, became "the main law in the distribution of consonants as syllable-closing and non-syllable-closing in ancient and modern Mongolian languages."

G. D. Sanzheev has now rediscovered this law with minor adjustments - the corresponding consonants were called non - local (n, ng, g, t, b, d, l, m, r, s, in very rare words and isolated cases-w) and prevocalic (x, t, h, j, j, l) [Sanzheev, 1964, p. 41].

T. Pagba quite correctly noted the historical merits of Choiji-Odser with such heartfelt words:" Having developed the rules of semasiology of the Mongolian language, having discovered the entire sound system of the language, Choiji-Odser really managed to reform writing and language " [Pagba, 1957, p.13].

Yu. N. Roerich wrote and published a few words about the personality of Choiji-Odser in Calcutta in 1945 in a very interesting article "Kunkhyen Choiji-Odser and the origin of Mongolian writing", published in English. From this article by an authoritative author, we learn very interesting and secret information from the biography of this scientist. It is no accident that in this case we have very scanty data on the life of Choiji-Odser in Mongolian sources.

Yu. N. Roerich wrote: "Our main source should be the biography - namtar Choiji-Odser, written by his disciple Kunpangzhang, no... This work, which exists only in manuscript and is extremely rare in Tibet, is not available outside of this country. This namtar was the main source for the brief biography of Choiji-Odser contained in Go-lotsawa's Blue Charter. Bud Rinpoche in his " Demchog choijung "(Bu-ston bKah-hbum, vol. V (Cha), also refers its readers to this namtar. According to Go-lotsawa, Lama Choiji-Odser, or Choiku-Odser, was born in the year of the dog-tree (1214)."

Yu. N. Roerich stated that: "If we preserve the dating of the Tibetan chronicles ("Blue Debter", "Reumaig"), then we will have to assume that Choiji-Odser probably worked at the court of Temur Uljeitu." He wrote: "If we accept the statements of the Tibetan and Mongol-

page 183
If we do not know that the author of the Russian chronicles of the XVIII-XIX centuries, then we must assume that Choiji-Odser lived a very long life, and that in 1310 he was 96 years old" [Roerich, 1999, p.169].

In the chapter on preaching Guhyasamaja Tantra, it is stated that Choiji-Odser was the natural son of the famous religious mentor Serdingpa Jonnu-od and the nun Sheirabchyan, known as the"nun of Gar". He "initially concealed his paternity and even contributed to the expulsion of this nun. When the boy was born, he was named Dagmed Dorje. The boy turned 5 years old, then the father decided that it was time to open the secret. So he arranged a tea party for the monastic community and received forgiveness for his sin. Then he initiated his son into the Teachings, and the latter, after taking monastic vows, received the name Choiji-Odser, which later Dochon Pagba changed to Choiku-Odser. His father sent him to Jachian Serma, a famous scholar and founder of the Kyangdur monastic school, who visited the famous Riboceng Monastery (Wutaishan in Shanxi, Western China). Later, Choiji-Odser studied the Kalachakra system and the works of Vimalaprabha under the guidance of Semocheba, a well - known expert on the Kalachakra system" (Roerich, 1999, pp. 168-169).

In our opinion, the scholar rightly wrote that he agrees with the opinion of B. Y. Vladimirtsov and P. Pellio that "Choiji-Odser, like his predecessor Sakya-pandita, did not create a new letter, but simply used the existing Uyghur letter instead of the official Mongolian khor-yig created by the Pagba Lama" [Roerich, 1999, p. 169].

Undoubtedly, Choiji-Odser, as a poet and translator, did a great job in the field of Mongolian Buddhism, met many difficulties on his way, overcame them, developed a number of true and valuable rules and laws of Mongolian philology, and therefore had a huge influence on the Tibetan-Mongolian cultural world of that time.

Thus, the statement of some authors that Choiji-Odser was an Omongolized Uyghur in the light of Yu. N. Roerich's article finds no confirmation. The years of Choiji-Odser's life are extremely confusing. Yu. N. Roerich proved that Choiji-Odser was born in 1214 and died in 1292 [Roerich, 1999, p. 170].

Conflicting data about the life of Choiji-Odser arose as a result of errors of scientists in chronologies, as well as the presence of a person with the same name who lived in the XIV century. [Roerich, 1999, pp. 169-170].

Philologist Zh. Nadmid believed that the original text of "Zurkhny Tolt" did not survive to our time, but was preserved thanks to the works of Danzandagba and Baligun Dalai (Nadmid, 1967, p.41). Danzandagba's treatise is called "Jirüken-ü tolta-yin tayilbüri" (18th century). Kara suggested its Russian translation in the following way: "The Heavenly Conspiracy, or an Explanation to the book" The Rim of the Heart "" [Kara, 1972, p. 16].

A. I. Taksubaev, a former graduate student of Leningrad State University, a Mongolist and later a diplomat, showed great scientific interest in Danzandagba's "Jirüken-ü tolta-yin tayilbüri" (XVIII century), who noted in his notes that " in the works of the available grammatical works of Mongolian authors of the XVIII-XIX centuries, a historical and philological approach to text analysis prevails. it involves the study of texts from the point of view of their creation history, structure, and language. At the same time, the retrospective-linguistic approach is also of particular interest, that is, the consideration of the text from the point of view of its conceptual structure and the metalanguage of linguistic description" [Taksubaev, 1970, p.156-158].

A. I. Taksubaev asserts that "Jirüken-ü tolta-yin tayilbüri" is a grammatical composition of a descriptive nature " [ibid., p. 157]. He believes that in this essay the author focuses on phonetics, morphology and spelling. The researcher, having focused on the moments of the language description, having found out the concept that he assumes, cites a fragment from the third subsection of the second part of the original: "... üsüg xuriyaju ner-e bolqu ner-e quriyaju üge bolqu üges-iyer udq-a-yi üjügüleqü tere cay-tur nököcel kereg-tü bolai " [Baldanzhapov, 1962, p. 46]. This passage is translated as follows: "... the name (ner-e) is assembled from letters, and the word (üge) is formed from names. Words form the concept (udq-a), and the expression of the concept requires accompanying elements (nököcel)" [Baldanzhapov, 1962, p.74].

page 184
A. I. Taksubaev suggests that Danzandagba was familiar with the metalanguage of Tibetan linguists. After analyzing the words (üge) and (udq-a) in different interpretations of lexical-semantic paradigms, he gives their interpretations üge "name" and udq-a "meaning". Based on his analysis of the semantics of these words, A. I. Taksubaev offers his own version of the explanation of the interpreted passage in the following lines: "... a name is collected from letters, a phrase (sentence) is collected from names, a phrase (sentence) expresses meaning, accompanying elements are needed to express meaning [Taksubaev, 1970, p. 158]. According to his version, üge "sentence", pege "name", nököcel "companion element" are three elements of the metalanguage that "implicitly order the entire grammatical description" [ibid.]. During the reign of Ligdan Khan of Chakhar, "Ganjur"was translated into Mongolian. A group of educated lamas worked on it. One of the editors and translators from this environment was Pandita Gunga-Odzer, the author of the essay "Chos kyi Odzhar-un jokiagsan nayman üsüg", which means in Russian translation"One hundred and eight letters composed by Choji-Odser". According to P. B. Baldanzhapov, this work contains 108 letters, which are sufficient for writing Mongolian words, but this work, according to Danzandagba, was secondary in comparison with Choiji-Odser's treatise (Baldanzhapov, 1962, p.11).

Mongolian author D. Tserenpil in his interesting article [Tserenpil, 1987, pp. 197-223] touched upon a number of burning issues in the history of Mongolian linguistics. He cites the original position taken from Panini's Grammar, which states: "There is however no homogeneity between vowels and consonants though their place and effort be equal" ("The Ashtadhyayi of Panini". "The Eight Books" by Panini / Translated from English Vol. 1. 1962, 1st chapter of the X-th Sutra). "There is no uniformity between vowels and consonants, although their place of formation (assia) and tension (prayatna) are still identical" (Tserenpil, 1987, p. 200). The author concludes that the separation of sounds is carried out according to the upaya-prajna principle. In it, the letter "performs the function of a relative element" [ibid., p. 202]. Then the author traced the evolution of vowels and their relationship with consonants in all the sources of "Zurkhny Tolt", which were compiled, in which each subsequent commentator updated the obscure ancient texts of the monument. The commentary was a favorite genre of Buddhist literature, including Mongolian philology.

D. Tserenpiel found a grammar manual of a certain Bandu, which said: "Eneküg üsüg terigün-i yakunu učirtu jirüken-ü tolta kemen nereyidiigsen bui kemebesu kümün töröged saca nom bičig-i medebesii jirüken oraysan - luy-a sacayu boluyad nom bičig-i medeküi-dür onca, üsüg massi keregtei inju jiriken-ü yool sudac metu-yin tulada toyinki jüreken-ü toli kemen nereyidügsen büyü... ""If we say why this primer is called "Mirror of the Heart", maybe tolta is written incorrectly instead of toli. Knowledge, that is, literacy, is an insight for a newborn, so I liken it to the heart aorta. Perhaps this is the name " [Tserenpil, 1987, p. 215].

Sh. Bira and O. Sukhe-Bator believe that the work" Zurkhny Tolt " by Gungazhaltsan was "the first Mongolian grammar" (Bira and Sukhe-Bator, 1980, p. 135). A number of Mongolian scholars have established that Gungajaltsan's Zurkhny Tolt is the original grammatical work, while Choiji-Odser's Zurkhny toltyn tailburn and Danzandagba's Zurkhny toltyn tailburn, ogtorguin mani are commentaries on commentaries (Tserenpil, 1987, p. 219). In our opinion, this consideration of the origin of "Zurkhny Tolt" and its sequels - compilations, has its own reason, making all the previous works of this cycle more accessible for subsequent times.

The treatises "Jirüken-ü tolta-yin tayilbüri" by Danzandagba and Baligun Dalai can now be considered thoroughly studied by scientists from different countries of the world.

Academician B. Y. Vladimirtsov, referring to the scientific significance of these grammatical works of the XVIII century, wrote: "The Mongols are trying to synthesize, to give a theory of this new literary language; from this point of view, we can consider the works:" Merged garku-jin oron chiruken-u tolta-jin Tayilbypi " and various dictionaries published by the efforts of Manchu scholars. emperors" [Vladimirtsov, 2005, p. 115]. Mongolian lin-

page 185
gvist T. Pagba (1957) and Buryat historian and philologist P. B. Baldanzhapov (1962) published their monographs of a source study nature, in which the monuments of grammatical thought of the Mongols were studied in detail.

Linguist D. spoke in his article about the teaching and translation activities of Baligun Dalai Uratsky, in which he described him as a linguist-phonetist, puts him on a par with Rabjamba Danzandagba 2002, p.483].

The tradition of grammatical teaching, coming from the "Jirüken-ü tolta", was perceived by the greatest theologian, philosopher and philologist Agvandandar Alashansky (1758-1852). F. I. Shcherbatskaya, who published Agvandandar's philosophical work, wrote about him as follows: "He (Agvandandar) is not one of those scientists who, hiding behind external erudition, try to disguise the difficulty or unsolvability of the question. On the contrary, he is a deep and honest thinker, a first - class philosophical mind" [Shcherbatskoy, 1916, p.II].

Agvandandar's works became known to European science thanks to the efforts of Professor G. Ts.Tsybikov (1910) and Academician B. Ya. Vladimirtsov, who highly appreciated his scientific work. Agvandandar was a polyglot and spoke Tibetan and Sanskrit in addition to his native Mongolian. He left many works in the Tibetan language. Agvandandar was a recognized grammarian and lexicographer.

Agvandandar composed the grammatical composition "Kelen-ü čimeg" in 1829. This educational grammar of the Mongolian language was written for simple Arats. He compiled a table of the Mongolian alphabet in syllabic form, known since the time of "Jirüken-ü tolta". A. I. Vorobyova believed that" the alphabet table represents the original and independent construction of Dandar " [Vorobyova, 1959, p. 150]. The phonetic system of the Mongolian language is based on vowel harmony. They are given the most complete description of the sound system of the language being studied. He highlighted the issues of spelling and morphology: this is the word composition, word formation, and inflection. Agvandandar paid great attention to the morphemics of the Mongolian language, revealed the role of suffixes, affixes and formants in the function of the language. Agvandandar's" Grammar of the Mongolian language " (Kelen-ü čimeg) can be considered innovative at that time, and he introduced a number of innovations in his work. He " distinguishes the accusative case and its affixes-yi, -i, and follows the norms of the living Mongolian language "[Vorobyova, 1959, p. 151].

Although Agvandandar's work "Kelen-ü čimeg" was intended only as a textbook, it has a lot of new and generalizing features, so it can be considered a pioneer, scientific one. In the vaults of St. Petersburg, Ulaanbaatar, Hohhot, Ulan-Ude there are many lists of this work of Agvandandar. Orientalist M. Taube (1961) published Agwandandar's work based on the Beijing woodcut in German translation. B. Setsen and Sh. Dalantai (Inner Mongolia) published the text "Kelen-ü čimeg" in " Mongol hal bichig "("Mongolian Philology"), and a brief review provides interesting data on source studies. The authors reported that on August 16, 1956, they managed to visit the Jeqün kiyad temple (Eastern Monastery) of the Alashan Khoshun of the Bayannur aimag. After visiting the small homeland of Aghvandandar, they acquired many books and woodcuts, manuscripts [Baldanzhapov, 1962, p. 12, 18].

P. B. Baldanzhapov published Agvandandar's "Kelen-ü čimeg" (1962) in Russian translation with corresponding notes and facsimiles, without transcription. In the appendix to the book, he also included Agwandandar's famous "Grammar of the Tibetan Language". Now in Dharmasala (India), at the residence of the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan language is taught from a textbook written by Agwandandar. As for the full title of Agvandandar's work, it sounds like this: "An essay called "Speech Decoration", detailing the rules of Mongolian writing", which is quite consonant with the content and tasks of this work of the remarkable Alashan Mongol.

Ancient Indian grammarians had a significant impact on the history of Mongolian linguistics. D. 2002, p. 391] believes that the Mongolian" Danjur " includes 50 works of Indian linguists, he names them in Mongolian and cites their sources. Panini's "Grammar" in the Formation of grammatical theory

page 186
The Mongols occupy one of the leading places. It is established that the Mongolian short translation of Panini's Grammar was made by Sumadishila (Luvsanchultam) and has come down to us as part of the Mongolian Danjur (XVIII century) (vol. 223, pp. 2b-57a). As is well known, many commentaries have been written on Panini's Grammar, which in Mongolian translations have come down to our time.

Panini's Grammar was created around the fifth century BC. It is called Ashtadhyayi (The Eight Books), and has been and remains the most complete description of the language, unsurpassed so far. Panini had predecessors, to which he counts a dozen names. D. 2002, p. 394], who studied its structure from the English translation, divides his work into eight books, which fall into parts, consist of 3995 rules in verse, the sloka inside - of 32 syllables. It is written in the form of prayers for memorizing the text in order to verbally convey the content textually. This grammar has incorporated questions of phonetics and morphology based on the knowledge of its predecessors, Panini develops them on the material of Sanskrit. D. 2002, pp. 395-396] considers the morphological structure of the word, according to Panini, in the following aspects:: 1) vocabulary; 2) word formation; 3) inflection. Panini, like his predecessors, finds four parts of speech in the morphology of Sanskrit: 1) nama (name); 2) akhyata (verb); 3) nipata (particle); 4) upasarga (preposition).

The case system given by Panini was accepted by Mongolian grammarians completely and without reservations. V. M. Nadelyaev wrote about the case forms as follows: "It is clear that the paragraph on the declension of teyin ilyal arm in the" Interpretation of the Heart Aorta "is not a fragment, even if it is reworked from Choiji-Odser's work"The Heart Aorta". Its content is a mechanical transfer to the Mongolian material of the Tibetan interpretation of declension, which, in turn, is not mechanically borrowed from Sanskrit grammar... Presumably, Danzan-Dagwa himself preserved 8 cases of one of the variants of the interpretation of declensions in Tibetan grammar, preserved their ordinal numbers as terminological names of cases and translated the main meanings of each case into Mongolian ... the interpretation of the Sanskrit case system turned out to be inadequate for the system of case indicators in Tibetan when it was borrowed from Sanskrit grammar to Tibetan. The further transfer of this theoretical interpretation, distorted by the actual language material of Tibetan, to the Mongolian soil led to the fact that one of the most important cases of the Mongolian declension - the accusative case-fell out of the description in the Mongolian grammatical work, although formally the term 2nd case (reflecting direct object relations in Sanskrit) is preserved. It took a fine linguistic sense, observation and analytical mind of the Urat gushi Bilig-yin Dalai to restore the rightful place of the accusative case in Mongolian grammar "(Nadelyaev, 1972, p. 163-164).

The absence of the accusative case is explained, according to M. N. Orlovskaya, "either by the fact that in the Mongolian language the accusative formant often coincides with the genitive formant, or, which is considered more likely, the author adheres not only to the ancient Indian case system, but also to the Tibetan one, in which the accusative case is absent, since it formally coincides with the nominative"[Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 90]. "Among the cases, there was no connective, which is not present in Tibetan, although its indicator is indicated by the author in the list of formative and service units. Cases were described exclusively according to the semantic principle, so the same case forms were present in different cases by name. The dative-local case of the modern Mongolian language is represented by three different cases, taking into account the semantic shades of meaning" [ibid.].

V. M. Nadelyaev saw the specificity and confusion of case systems in Tibetan, which fell into the Mongolian language, and predicativity in object relations: "In the Tibetan language, the construction of a sentence with a transitive verb as a predicate is ergative, so it does not have special indicators for the name to express direct object relations.-

page 187
However, the subject in these sentences is most often formed by an indicator of correctness" [Nadelyaev, 1972, p. 163].

M. N. Orlovskaya writes:: "In the early grammatical works, the foundations of word classification were laid, where Indo-Tibetan influence also affected: all words were divided into ner - names and nekhtsol - accompanying elements, as it was believed, could not express the meaning of a sentence by themselves, but only in combination with each other. Words were divided into categories according to their role in the sentence, some particles were distinguished (ami, inu, ele), conjunctions (kiged, boged), postpositions (biir-un), individual verb forms (bolai - 'was', boltuyai - 'let it be', called by the term üges-ün ayalyu borrowed from Panini"[Orlovskaya, 1993, p. 91].

T. E. Katenina and V. I. Rudoy believe that "Panini's work is constructed in such a way that, starting from the meaning, choosing the appropriate lexical morphemes (the verb root or the primary basis of the name) and the construction dictated by the verb's character or communicative task, having performed all the prescribed operations, we get phonetically correct sentences at the "output"." Panini's Grammar is written in a complex metalanguage, which is reflected in the Mongolian grammars of the 18th century. [Katenina and Rudoy, 1980, p. 75].

list of literature

Baldanzhapov P. B. Jirüken-ü tolta-yin taylbüri. Mong. Grammatical works of the XVIII century / Mong. text., Russian translation, note. Ulan-Ude, 1962a.

Baldanzhapov P. B. Kelen-ü čimeg. Mong. grammatical op. XIX century / Mong. text., rus. transl., note. Ulan-Ude, 19626.

Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Mongolian collection of stories from Pančatantara / / Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Works on the literature of the Mongolian peoples. Moscow, 2005.

Vorob'eva A. I. Mongol grammatical composition Kelen-ü čimeg / / Problems of Oriental Studies. 1959. N6.

Damdinsuren Ts. Mongol uran zohiolyn toim (Essay on the history of Mongolian literature). Кн. 1. Улаанбаатар, 1957.

Katenina T. E., Rudoy V. I. Lingvisticheskie znaniya v drevnoi Indii [Linguistic knowledge in ancient India]. Drevnyj mir, L., 1980.
Matusevich M. I. Vvedenie v obshchuyu fonetiku [Introduction to General Phonetics]. Moscow, 1948.

Nadelyaev V. M. Tibetskaya grammaticheskaya traditsiya v mongol'skoy natsional'noi grammatike [The Tibetan Grammatical Tradition in Mongolian National Grammar]. Vol. 1. Novosibirsk. 1972.

Supermid Zh. Mongol halny bichigiin tuuhen hegzhliin tovch toim (A brief overview of the historical development of the written Mongolian language). Улаанбаатар, 1967.

Orlovskaya M. N. Indo-Tibetan traditions in Mongolian linguistics. Issledovaniya po istorii mongol'skikh yazykov [Studies on the history of Mongolian languages]. Ulan-Ude, 1973.

Pagba T. "Zurkhny toltyn tailbar" - - n-yg sudalsan tuhai temdeglal (Notes on the study of the treatise "Explanation of the "Heart aorta"). Улаанбаатар, 1957.

Roerich Yu. N. Kunkhyen Choiji-Odser. Origin of the Mongolian script // Roerich Yu. N. Tibet and Central Asia. Samara, 1999.

Sanzheev G. D. Old Written Mongolian language, Moscow, 1964.
Taksubaev A. I. Zametki ob analiz mongol'skikh grammaticheskikh sochineniy [Notes on the analysis of Mongolian grammatical Compositions]. 1970. N4.

D. Panininum "Asar ulamj ayalguuni naiman ih sudar" batuuniy tailbaruud ("Eight Books" of Panini and Mongolian interpretations to him) / / D. Mongol hal shenjlaliyn onol, tuuhiin asuudaluud (Problems of the theory and history of Mongolian linguistics). Улаанбаатар, 2002.

D. O wa, we b "Jireken-ü tolta" Sakya Pandits of Gungajaltsan // Д. Монгол хэлшэнжлэлийн онол туухийн асуудалууд. Улаанбаатар, 2002.

Tserenpil D. Division of sounds of the Mongolian language into vowels and consonants in the comments to "Jirüken-ü tolta" / / Studia Mongolica. T. XII. Fasc. 14. Ulan-Bator, 1987.

Tserensodnom D. Choiji-Odser. Монгол номын "Зурхний талът" хэмээх нэрт зуун найман уеэг. Д. Цэрэнсодном хэвлэлд бэлтгэв ("One hundred and eight letters "under the title" cardiac aorta " / Preparation for printing by D. Tserensodnam). Улаанбаатар, 2002.

The Tibetan translation of the works of Samlanantarasiddhi Dharmakirti Samtanantarasiddhitika Vinitadaova together with the Tibetan interpretation compiled by Agvan-Dandar lharamba / Published by F. I. Shcherbatskaya. Pb., 1916.

Bira Sh., Siikhbatar O. On the Tibetian and Mongolian Translations of Suasion Grammatical Works // Jadologica tanrinensia. T. VII (1979). Torino, 1980.

D. The ancient Indian linguistic works in Mongolian Danjur // D. Mongol hal shenjleliin onol tuuhiin asuudaluud (Problems of the theory and history of Mongolian linguistics). Улаанбаатар, 2002.

page 188

Permanent link to this publication: