The Linguosynergetic Model of the Concept “Qut”

Authors

  • Aliya Biyazdykova Kazakh National Academy of Arts named after Temirbek Zhurgenov
  • Aida Sarsembayeva Kazakh National Academy of Arts named after Temirbek Zhurgenov
  • Karlygash Demeubekova Kazakh National Research Technical University named after K.I. Satpayev
  • Galina Kadyrova Satbayev University
  • Shalabay Berdibay Sh. Ualikhanov Kokshetau University
  • Gulden Kazhibayeva Sh. Ualikhanov Kokshetau University
  • Ainash Kurmanova Sh. Ualikhanov Kokshetau University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1608.11

Keywords:

linguosynergetics, “Qut”, Kazakh worldview, cultural semantics, conceptual dynamics

Abstract

This article develops a linguosynergetic model of the concept “Qut” drawing on historical-cultural sources and the methodological principles of synergetics. The analysis reconstructs the concept’s diachronic semantic trajectory across four major stages: (i) an archaic mythological interpretation characterized by semantic diffuseness; (ii) a Turkic-period rationalization in which “Qut” becomes embedded in political philosophy and state ideology; (iii) an Islamic-era reconfiguration that introduces a religious-spiritual bifurcation of meanings; and (iv) a Kazakh-stage axiological expansion in which “Qut” is linked to prosperity, social harmony, and the unity of people and land. To describe these transformations, the study applies key synergetic notions–nonlinearity, self-organization, attractor formation, and shifts to new semantic levels under external socio-cultural pressures. “Qut” is therefore interpreted as a semiospheric and culturally adaptive structure that preserves a stable semantic ядро while continuously generating new peripheral meanings in response to changing historical contexts. In Turkic political discourse, “Qut” functions as a marker of legitimate authority and state stability; in Islamic tradition, it operates as a spiritual attractor associated with divine light and sustenance; and in the Kazakh worldview it acquires a pronounced value dimension connected with wellbeing, land-peace, communal concord, and national cohesion. Contemporary expressions such as qutty qadam (“auspicious step”) and qutty meken (“auspicious place”) illustrate the concept’s productive integration into modern linguistic practice. The findings show that “Qut” constitutes a multilayer, dynamically self-organizing cultural-conceptual system with a stable attractor, and they support the use of linguosynergetics as a methodological framework for investigating Kazakh linguistic consciousness.

References

Agabekova, Z., Amirbekova, A., Kalybekova, K., Ospanova, D., Abylayeva, B., & Khassenov, B. (2024, October). Activation of «COVID» Words in the Kazakh Language: Statistical Analysis. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 6(4), 194-202.

Alduais, A., Yassin, A. A., & Allegretta, S. (2025). Computational linguistics: a scientometric review. Quality & Quantity, 59(5), 4097-4136.

al-Kashgari, M. (1997). Dictionary of the Turkic language (Diwani Lugat-it-Turk) (Vol. 1; A. K. Yegeubay, Trans.). Almaty: Khant.

Balasagun, Zh. (2007). Kutty bilik (A. Yegeubayev, Trans.; Vol. 5). Almaty: Taimas.

Bazilev, V. N. (1998). Synergetic language: Exfoliation of sortilege practices. Moscow: Dialogue–Moscow State University.

Baltabayeva, A., Bakenova, A., Amirbekova, A., Sametova, Z., Kalybekova, K., Samenkyzy, U., & Khassenov, B. (2024). Semantic Features of the Word Qonyr (Brown): Conceptual Analysis of Two Separate Works. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 14(11), 3347-3354.

Budanov, V. G. (2009). Synergetic methodology in post-nonclassical science and education (3rd ed.). Moscow: LKI Publishing House.

Feldman, J. A. (2006). From molecule to metaphor: A neural theory of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://reallib.org/reader?file=1088623&pg=5 (22.09.2025)

He, S., & Hani Shaari, A. (2025). Hot spots and emerging trends in ‘event’ research in linguistics (2001–2023): A bibliometric analysis. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 12(1), 2488086.

Hoppál, M. (2012). Avrasya’da şamanlar [Shamans in Eurasia]. Istanbul: Ağustos.

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Issabekova, U. K. (2017). Peculiarities of historical development of the concept Qut. In Text. Book (No. 13, pp. 5–16). Tomsk: National Research Tomsk State University.

István, D. S. (2006). Batïrkan, a Kazakh shaman from the Altay Mountains (Mongolia). Shaman, 14, 117–138.

Kerimkhanuly, B. (2022, February 18). Kut is in the ears of a sheep. Syr Boyi. https://syrboyi.kz/akparat/qut-qojdyng-ulaghynda-87788 (10.12.2025)

Knyazeva, E. N., & Kurdyumov, S. P. (2010). Synergetic foundations: Synergetic worldview. Moscow: LIBRO-COM.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Langacker, R. W. (2006). Introduction to concept, image, and symbol. In D. Geeraerts (Ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2017). Complexity theory and language development. In L. Ortega & Z. H. Han (Eds.), Complexity theory and language development (pp. 1–234). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1093/ELT/CCY033

Mainzer, K. (2009). Thinking in complexity: The computational dynamics of matter, mind, and mankind (G. G. Malinetsky, Ed.; Trans. from English). Moscow: LIBROKOM.

Maslova, V. A. (2021). Through the synergetic union of linguistics and other sciences: New problems and directions. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 12(3), 823–847. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/cherez-sinergeticheskiy-soyuz-lingvistiki-s-drugimi-naukami-k-novym-problemam-i-napravleniyam (12.11.2025)

Nadelyaev, V. M., Nasilov, D. M., Tenishev, E. R., & Sherbak, A. M. (Eds.). (1969). Ancient Turkic dictionary. Leningrad: Nauka.

Nurmuratov, S. (2016). Spiritual values of the Kazakh people: History and modern times. Adam Alem, 3(69), 87–94.

Pikhtovnikova, L. S. (2012). Lingvosynergetics: Principles and essays. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University.

Ponomarenko, E. V. (2004). Functional systematicity of discourse (based on the English language). Moscow.

Sharip, A. (2007, July 26). Qut, sur, and unexplored aspects of national consciousness. Aykyn, 25.

Siregar, I. (2025). Reimagining the Linguistic Roadmap as a Key Variable of a Multidisciplinary Approach. Britain International of Linguistics Arts and Education (BIoLAE) Journal, 7(1), 43-54.

Telebaev, G. (2017). About ancient Turkic category “Qut”. Mysl, 3, 32–37.

Tishin, V. V. (2022). The concept of qut in monuments of ancient Turkic runic writing: Revision of treatises. Eurasian People and Religion, 27(2), 105–120.

Turmanzhanov, O., & Akhmetbekuly, K. (Comp.). (2004). Kazakh proverbs. Almaty: Raritet.

Zhanabayev, Zh. M., & Tursynbayeva, A. O. (2021). The problem of “Qut” in traditional Kazakh culture. Journal of Philosophy Culture and Political Science, 76(2), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.26577/jpcp.2021.v76.i2.04

Downloads

Published

2026-08-01

Issue

Section

Articles