Consonants The consonant system had a two-way contrast of
stop consonants (
fortis vs. lenis),
k, p, t vs.
g, b, d. There was also an
affricate consonant,
č; at least one
sibilant s and
sonorants
m, n, ń, ŋ, r, l with a full series of
nasal consonants. Some scholars additionally reconstruct the
palatalized sounds
ĺ and
ŕ for the correspondence sets
Oghuric /l/ ~
Common Turkic *š and Oghuric /r/ ~ Common Turkic *z. Most scholars, however, assume that these are the regular reflexes of Proto-Turkic *l and *r. Oghuric is thus sometimes referred to as
Lir-Turkic and Common Turkic as
Shaz-Turkic. A glottochronological reconstruction based on analysis of
isoglosses and Sinicisms points to the timing of the
r/z split at around 56 BCE–48 CE. As
Anna Dybo puts it, that may be associated with the historical situation that can be seen in the history of the
Huns' division onto the Northern and Southern [groups]: the first separation and withdrawal of the Northern Huns to the west has occurred, as was stated above, in 56 BC,... the second split of the (Eastern) Huns into the northern and southern groups happened in 48 AD. There was no fortis-lenis contrast in word-initial position: the initial stops were always
*b,
*t,
*k, the affricate was always
*č and the sibilant was always
*s. In addition, the nasals and the liquids did not occur in that position either. Like in many modern Turkic languages, the velars /k/, /g/, and possibly /ŋ/ seem to have had back and front allophones ( and , and , and ) according to their environments, with the velar allophones occurring in words with front vowels, and uvular allophones occurring in words with back vowels. The lenis stops /b/, /d/ and /g/~/ɢ/ may have tended towards fricatives intervocalically.
Vowels Like most of its descendants, Proto-Turkic exhibited
vowel harmony, distinguishing vowel qualities
a, ï, o, u vs.
e, ẹ, i, ö, ü, as well as two vowel quantities. Here,
macrons represent long vowels. Some scholars (e.g.
Gerhard Doerfer) additionally reconstruct a mid back unrounded
*ë based on cognate sets with Chuvash, Tuvan and Yakut
ï corresponding to
a in all other Turkic languages, although these correspondences can also be explained as deriving from *
a which underwent subsequent sound changes in those three languages. The phonemicity of the distinction between the two close unrounded vowels, i.e. front
*i and back
*ï, is also rejected by some. == Morphology ==