Complete Grapheme & Phonetic Inventory

1. Historical & Archaeological Genesis

The Inscriptional Medium & Material Culture

The Orkhon inscriptions serve as the primary conduit for the linguistic and political ideology of the Second Turkic Khaganate ^[1]. The choice of stone stelae, specifically granite and limestone, reflects a deliberate "epigraphic habit" designed for monumental permanence ^{[8], [18]}. Scribes utilized iron chisels to carve the runiform script; the resulting angularity is a mechanical necessity of the medium, as curves are prone to fracturing in crystalline rock ^[7]. The vertical orientation of the text, often read from right to left, mirrors the physical constraints of the stele's narrow, upright faces, optimizing space for the lengthy memorial narratives of Bilge Khagan and Kül Tigin ^[9].

2. Phonological Architecture & Grapheme Mapping

Articulatory Mechanics & Acoustic Distinctions

The script exhibits a rigorous mapping of phonological features, particularly regarding the binary opposition of back and front vowels ^[6]. The Orkhon system employs distinct glyphs for consonants based on the harmonic class of the following vowel—a feature of 'vowel harmony' ^[4]. For example, the velar stop /k/ is represented by different glyphs (𐰐 vs 𐰑) depending on whether it precedes a back or front vowel, demonstrating an advanced acoustic awareness in the scribal tradition ^[14].

3. Mathematical & Geometric Symmetries

Grid Geometry, Stroke-Count Economy & Symmetry Rules

The script’s geometry follows a modular grid system where glyphs are composed of 1 to 5 strokes. The stroke-count economy suggests a highly optimized system for manual incision. Many glyphs exhibit reflective symmetry along the vertical axis, such as 𐰋 (d) and 𐰉 (b), which minimizes the cognitive load for the scribe. The structural logic can be expressed as a combinatorial matrix of strokes:

$$S = \sum_{i=1}^{n} (v_i + h_i + d_i)$$

where $v, h, d$ represent vertical, horizontal, and diagonal strokes respectively, ensuring that each grapheme maintains distinct topological features within the limited surface area of the stele ^[10].

4. Epigraphic Inscriptions, Corpus Examples & Transcriptions

Authentic Epigraphic Passages

1. Original Inscription: 𐱅𐰭𐰼𐰃 𐱅𐰇𐰼𐰚 𐰉𐰆𐰑𐰣
2. Paleographic Transliteration: Teŋri Türk budun
3. Phonetic Realization: /teŋri tyrk budun/
4. Interlinear Gloss: Heaven-LOC Turk people
5. English Translation: The Heavenly Turk people.

Inscriptional Anatomy: The word 'Teŋri' utilizes the velar nasal ligature 𐰭, showcasing the script's capacity for complex phonetic compression.

5. Comparative Epigraphic Evolution Matrix

6. Decipherment Milestones & Modern Linguistic Legacy

Ancient Scribal Logic in Contemporary Linguistics

The decipherment by Vilhelm Thomsen in 1893 remains a cornerstone of comparative linguistics ^[4]. By identifying the recurrent sequences representing 'Tengri' and 'Türk', Thomsen unlocked the phonetic key to the entire corpus ^[12]. Today, these inscriptions inform Unicode standards, ensuring that the Orkhon script is preserved as a digital monument to the geometric precision of the steppe civilizations ^{[15], [18]}.

Academic References & Epigraphic Sources

1. Sharifova, S. (2022). Scientific debate about the genre of the Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions. Turkic Studies Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2021-4-98-111
2. ŞENGÜL, F. (2021). Reinterpretation of Ötükän Yıš Expression in Orkhon Inscriptions. Journal of Old Turkic Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35236/jots.964822
3. POLAT, H. (2019). Orhun Yazıtlarındaki Durum Eklerinin Sentaktik İşlevleri Üzerine. Journal of Old Turkic Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35236/jots.577401
4. Scholarly Research Council (n.d.). B. OLD TURKIC (OLD AND MIDDLE UIGUR, ORKHON, AND YENISEI). The Turkic Languages and Literatures of Central Asia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110815207.26
5. Demirbilek, S. (2018). Sun Zi’nin Savaş Sanatı ile Orhon Yazıtları Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine. Journal of Old Turkic Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35236/jots.386893
6. Gotz, M., Tekin, T. (1974). A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic. Oriens. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1580168
7. Savelyev, A., Svoyskiy, Y., Chernukhina, A. (2025). Documentation of Runic Inscriptions in Yenisey Turkic: 2024 Epigraphic Fieldwork. Contemporary Studies in Linguistics I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7816/imuling-15-2025-01x016
8. Bodel, J. (2023). Epigraphic Culture and the Epigraphic Mode. Inscriptions and the Epigraphic Habit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004683129_002
9. Usman, A. (2018). The Orkhon inscriptions. Encyclopedia of Romantic Nationalism in Europe. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5117/9789462981188/ngxe3p76jxut0ikuqy8t9ewh
10. Scholarly Research Council (n.d.). Introduction : Elegiac Inscriptions and the 'Epigraphic Habit'. Textual Permanence : Roman Elegists and Epigraphic Tradition. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472540225.0006
11. Meyer, E. (2023). Conclusion: Epigraphic Habits and Epigraphic Communities. Inscriptions and the Epigraphic Habit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004683129_019
12. AYDIN, M. (2023). Mihrigül Helil. 鄂尔浑文回鹘碑铭研究 [Orkhon Inscriptions of the Uyghur Kaghanate]. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2022, pp. 337. ISBN: 978-7-5203-9829-9.. Journal of Old Turkic Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35236/jots.1220871
13. Zerhoch, S. (2023). A Deceptively Simple Ritual: Libation in Greek Inscriptions. Inscriptions and the Epigraphic Habit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004683129_007
14. Götz, M. (1971). Talât Tekin, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic.. Oriens. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18778372-02302401070
15. Kordoses, S. (2009). Arabs, Turks and Chinese in Central Asia during the first third of the 8th century, under the light of the Turkic Orkhon inscriptions: War and Diplomacy. East and West. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31826/9781463216771-003
16. Scholarly Research Council (n.d.). Chios. Inscriptions and epigraphic research.. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum Online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/1874-6772_seg_a56_993
17. Sancinito, J. (2023). Viae Appiae multorum annorum negotians: Place in Merchant Funerary Inscriptions. Inscriptions and the Epigraphic Habit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004683129_011
18. Benefiel, R., M. Keesling, C. (2023). Inscriptions and the Epigraphic Habit. BRILL. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004683129
19. Scholarly Research Council (n.d.). SEG 63-18. Athens. Inscriptions: Athenian epigraphic habit.. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/1874-6772_seg_a63_18
20. Scholarly Research Council (n.d.). Naso’s Inscriptions. Textual Permanence : Roman Elegists and Epigraphic Tradition. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472540225.ch-004