Zamirler, tek başlarına anlamları olmayan nesneleri temsil ya da işaret yoluyla karşılayan kelimelerdir. Nesnelerin isimleri değildirler ve geçici olarak o isimlerin yerini tutarlar. Zamirler, kendilerinden sonra gelen kelime ya da kelime gruplarına ilgi hâli eki alarak bağlanırlar. Çağatay Türkçesi döneminde kullanılan şahıs zamirleri, min, sin, biz, siz; işaret zamirleri, bu, ol' dur. Çağatay Türkçesinde üçüncü şahsı ifade eden şahıs zamiri yoktur; yerine işaret zamiri ol kullanılmaktadır. Şahıs zamirlerinin ilgi hâli eki almış şekilleri mening / mining; sening/ sining; bizning, sizning; işaret zamirlerinin ilgi hâli eki almış şekilleri munıng / munung, anıng / alarnıng'dır. Bir dilin ana dil olduğunu gösteren ölçütler arasında sayı adları, sayı sistemi, vücut ve organ isimlerinin dışında şahıs zamirlerini de saymak mümkündür. Bu çalışmada, dili ana dil yapan ölçütlerden şahıs ve işaret zamirleri incelenmiş, bu zamirlerin Çağatay Türkçesi döneminde kullanılan şekilleri olan mining, sining; bizing, sizing ve işaret zamirlerinden olan ve şahıs zamiri olarak kullanılan anıng ile işaret zamiri munung'un iyelik eki almış kelimelerle tamlama şeklinde kuruluşu ve söz dizimi açısından farklı kullanımları değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca, Türkiye Türkçesi döneminde şahıs zamirleri düşürülerek tamlama oluşturulurken Çağatay Türkçesinin klasik dönem eserlerinden olan Ali Şîr Nevâyî'nin divan ve mesnevileri ile Hüseyin Baykara ve Lutfî'nin Divanı'nda tespit edilen tamlamalarda, tamlayan ve tamlanan yer değiştirse görülmektedir. Ayrıca tamlamalarda, tamlayan ile tamlanan arasında zamir ve sıfatların, pekiştirme ifade eden bağlaçların kullanıldığı görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada, Çağatay Türkçesindeki şahıs ve işaret zamirlerinin ilgi hâl eki alarak tamlama şeklinde kullanımları incelenmeye çalışılacaktır. Bu makalede, Çağatay Türkçesinin klasik döneminde eser veren, Ali Şîr Nevâyî'nin divan ve mesnevileri ile Hüseyin Baykara ve Lutfî'nin Divan'ı taranarak eserlerden örnekler verilecektir

Pronouns are the words that substitute for objects either through pointing to them or taking place of them. Pronouns are meaningless when they are not used in a context but alone. They are not the names of objects but they substitute for them. They can be made interrelated to the nouns or noun phrases that come after them using possessive suffixes. Personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns which were used in Chagatai Turkish are “min, sin, biz, siz” and “bu, ol” respectively. There is no third singular personal pronoun in Chagatai Turkish: the demonstrative pronoun “ol” is used in place of it. When personal pronouns take relative pronoun, they become “mening / mining; sening/ sining; bizning, sizning, when demonstrative pronouns take relative pronoun, they become “munıng / munung, anıng / alarnıng”. Among the criteria that a native language (mother-tongue) should have, apart from names of numbers, systems of numbers, names of body and organs, personal pronouns can also be counted. In this study, mining, sining and bizing, sizing which are the forms of personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns which are one of the criteria that makes a language ‘a native language’ and which are used in Chagatai Turkish and anıÆ which is one of demonstrative pronouns and which can be used as personal pronoun and use of munuÆ with words which are attached to possessive suffix in a construction and its different uses in terms of syntax are examined by giving some samples of couplets from divan and masnavi of Ali Şir Nevâyî and from divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara, who created some works in Chagatai Turkish. While Turkish pronouns are being reduced during the Turkish Turkish period, they can not be reduced during the Cagatay Turkish period. In addition, in the between genitive case and determination of determinative groups used personal and demonstrative pronouns are seen that used conjunctions, pronouns and adjectives. Especially the conjunctions are used to express reinforcement in the sentence. However, in the usage as determinative groups of pronouns, in the genitive case and determination of determinative groups have been seen their place changes. In this study, it is tried to examine the use of the personal and demonstrative pronouns of Chagatai Turkısh in the form of determinative group It has been given some samples of couplets from divan and masnavi of Ali Şir Nevâyî, from divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara who created some works in Chagatai Turkish. Pronouns are the words that substitute for objects either through pointing to them or taking place of them. Pronouns are meaningless when they are not used in a context but alone. They are not the names of objects but they substitute for them. They can be made interrelated to the nouns or noun phrases that come after them using possessive suffixes. Personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns which were used in Chagatai Turkish are “min, sin, biz, siz” and “bu, ol” respectively. There is no third singular personal pronoun in Chagatai Turkish: the demonstrative pronoun “ol” is used in place of it. When personal pronouns take relative pronoun, they become “mening / mining; sening/ sining; bizning, sizning”, when demonstrative pronouns take relative pronoun, they become “munıng / munung, anıng / alarnıng”. In this study,mining, sining and bizing, sizing which are the forms of personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns which are one of the criteria that makes a language ‘a native language’ and which are used in Chagatai Turkish and anıng which is one of demonstrative pronouns and which can be used as personal pronoun and use of munung with words which are attached to possessive suffix in a construction and its different uses in terms of syntax are examined by giving some samples of couplets from divan and masnavi of Ali Şir Nevâyî, from divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara, who created some works in Chagatai Turkish. Introduction to the Study and Its Objective: Chagatai Turkish, which has continued its existence as a speech language and a written language both in the Black Sea, the Caucasus Mountains, the Caspian Sea and Iran, extending from the beginning of the 15th century to the beginning of the 20th century and extending to the north and east, It is a source of Turkish language work with rich language materials. In this work, divan and masnavis of Ali Şîr Nevâyî, the divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara who created some works in Chagatai Turkish were examined. The usage patterns of the personal and demonstrative pronouns of Chagatai Turkish period were detected. Some examples were given from these studies. Conceptual Framework of the Study: In this study, mining, sining and bizing, sizing which are the forms of personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns which are one of the criteria that makes a language ‘a native language’ and which are used in Chagatai Turkish and anıng which is one of demonstrative pronouns and which can be used as personal pronoun and use of munung with words which are attached to possessive suffix in a construction and its use with prepositions or its different uses in terms of syntax are examined by giving some samples of couplets from divan and masnavi of Ali Şir Nevâyî, from divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara, who created some works in Chagatai Turkish. There have been many studies on pronouns. Some of these are: Abik, D. (2003). The separation of pronouns in Kutadgu Bilig. Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Sempozyumu 2003-Mustafa Canpolat Armağanı. Ankara; Erdem, M. (2005). Pronouns, Are Meaningful Words, or Are they Meaning Words? Türk Dili Dergisi, S.641, ss.444-449; Demir, Celâl. (2007). The Semantıc and Syntactıcal Characterıstıcs of The Elements Constıtutıng Noun Closes ın Turkey’s Turkısh, Turkısh Studies, İnternational Periodical For The Languages, Literature And History Of Turkish Or Turkic Volume 2/4 Fall 2007,p.1135-1142, ANKARA-TURKEY, Tömörtogoo, D. (2008). System of personal pronouns in Mongolia.(Çev. Fevzi Ersoy). Gazi Üniversitesi Türkiyat Dergisi. Güz, Sayı: 3, Karahan, L.(2009). Expansion in the dative of Personal and Demonstrative Pronouns in Turkısh. Ahmet Yesevi Üniversitesi, III. Uluslararası Türkoloji Kongresi.18-20 Mayıs 2009.Türkistan, s.124-130, Akçataş, A. (2010). Semantic Content of Pronouns ın Turkey Turkısh. Turkısh Studies, Volume 5/4, Fall 2010, p.1-14, Ankara-Turkey, Benzer, Ahmet. (2012).Belirtili Ad Tamlamasında İyelik Eki ve İlgi Eki Yanılgısı. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 7/4, Fall 2012, p. 1051-1061, ANKARA-TURKEY, Ceritoğlu, M. (2014).On the Reflexive Pronouns and ıts usage ın Kyrgyz Trukısh, Turkısh Studies, İnternational Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkısh or Turkıc, Volume 9/3, Winter 2014, p.351-364. Ankara-Turkey; Toprak, F. (2016). Functions of the Orıentatıon-state reflexıvıty pronouns Kutadgu Bilig, Turkısh Studies, Volume 11/20, Fall 2016, ss.583-604, Ankara: Turkey In “the separation of pronouns in Kutadgu Bilig”, Abik, the use of pronouns in the form of separation has examined. In “Pronouns, Are Meaningful Words, or Are they Meaning Words?”, Erdem has classified the word types.He has mentioned the way in which the vocabulary types are handled in Turkic language and from their place among the vocabulary types of pronouns. In the Semantıc and Syntactıcal Characterıstıcs of The Elements Constıtutıng Noun Closes ın Turkey’s Turkısh, Demir, has evaluated the name constructions syntactically and semantically. He draws attention to the problems of classification and naming in texts. In this study named the Delucion of Possessive and Genıtıf Suffıx ın Determinative Noun Phrase have been indicated that specified possessive suffix known as attachment in Turkish, in fact, possessive meaning does not give these crops before him with word of interest was established and have the person or object information given, possession of the possessive phrase first words are added to the interest supplement was determined to be known as the annex. In “On the Reflexive Pronouns and ıts usage ın Kyrgyz Turkısh “ Ceritoğlu, the place of the pronouns within the main and auxiliary words has emphased by basing it on the relations between from the words the relations between the signifier and signified of a language sign. In the rest of this work, Ceritoğlu have collected the samples of reflexive pronouns from some novels and short stories written in Kyrgyz. He has expressed shown symbolizing degree of the persons of reflexive pronouns ın Kyrgyz Turkısh. In “Expansion in the dative of Personal and Demonstrative Pronouns in Turkısh”, Karahan has aimed to explain in which dialects and how + (G)Ar- and (G) An suffixes are used and discusses the origines of “r, n” consonants in these suffixes. There are various claims on the structure of + (G)Ar and +(G)An suffixes. In “Functions of the Orıentatıon-state reflexıvıty pronouns Kutadgu Bilig”,Toprak has been examined functions of the orientation state reflexivitiy pronouns. In additional, she has tried to be denote that the pronouns should be considered as dependent, not independent components, in terms of time. In “Semantic Content of Pronouns ın Turkey Turkısh”,Akçataş, has aimed to examine the semantic content of pronouns in Turkey Turkısh. The definition of the term “pronouns” was reconsidered in this sense and it was revealed that a new classificaton should be made. Furthermore, the term “substitution” was re-examined and it was concluded that “all words denote an aspect of pronouns since they correspond to concepts of the real world. Ersoy translated this aricle called "the System of personal pronouns in Mongolia" from Tömörtogoo. In this article, Mongolian pronouns have been exemplified in their use as additional suffixes. This work is different from the previous studies because is a study which demonstrates how to use personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns pronouns in Chagatai Turkısh period. While Turkish pronouns are being reduced during the Turkish Turkish period, they can not be reduced during the Cagatay Turkish period. In addition, in the between genitive case and determination of determinative groups used personal and demonstrative pronouns are seen that used conjunctions. It is seen that these uses reinforce the sentence. However, in the usage as determinative groups of pronouns, in the genitive case and determination of determinative groups have been seen their place changes. İn this work, ıt will been tried to be demonstrate and examined functions and usage of personal and demonstrative pronouns. It has been given some samples of couplets from divan and masnavi of Ali Şir Nevâyî, from divan of Lutfî and Hüseyin Baykara who created some works in Chagatai Turkish. Methodology: This study was carried out through the techniques of scanning. In the scanned works, examples of couplets in which the demonstrative and personal pronouns found were given. Personal pronouns and demonstrative pronouns were classified in the form displaced of genitive case and determination noun phrase, undisplace of genitive case and determination noun phrase, usage with postposition. When classifying pronouns, they tried to be evaluated according to their syntax, not meaning. But, In the examples, the couplet explanations are given. Finding and Discussion: It is seen that the pronouns used in the Chagatai Turkish period are related to the words and prepositions that follow them as they were in the Turkish era. While Turkish pronouns are being reduced during the Turkish Turkish period, they can not be reduced during the Cagatay Turkish period. As example: “mining hatırımġa, bizing imâret”. In addition, in the between genitive case and determination of determinative groups used personal and demonstrative pronouns are seen that used conjunctions as “daġı ve hem”. It is seen that these uses reinforce the sentence. Examples are those: munung daġı kâmın, munung hem könglin. However, in the usage as determinative groups of pronouns, in the genitive case and determination of determinative groups have been seen their place changes. Especially when the demonstrative pronouns are used as pronouns, it is seen that in the personal pronouns this feature is encountered in the example of “anıÆ daġı bergini” they have obtained by the conjunctions expressing reinforcement. It is seen that the personal and demonstrative pronouns are used with prepositions: munung birle, munung dik; sining birle, bizing sarıdın vb. There is also an example of the use with adjectives, pronouns, postpositons and postposition groups in the between genetive and determinative: such as mining gül-gûn yaşımdın, mining andın ösrüklüküm, sening ay tig cemâlıngnı, There is also chain name completion (example: bizing şeh sözi, bizning zemìn bÿsını) and the use of determinative which is connected to more than one (example: anıng zülf ü köz ü kaddin). As a result, it can be said that, in these examples determined from the works belonging to Chagatai Turkısh period, the completions composed of person and demonstrative pronouns are not a uniform structure and vary in terms of syntax. The Result and Suggestions: New studies that are going to be done about pronouns may contribute to how prounouns were used in different functions in the other periods. In the grammatical works, pronouns can be analyzed in terms of functions with example sentences.