"Receiving the title of Professor by K. T. Tynystanov in 1936"

E. D. Polivanov, in particular, supported the hypothesis of the Yenisei origin of the Kyrgyz, linking this to the absence in Central Asia of another Turkic language specifically close to Kyrgyz. At the same time, the author speaks of the numerous ethnic components of the Kyrgyz nationality—both migratory and local, from the Tian Shan region. The scholar clarifies:

“When speaking here (and below) about the linguistic ancestors of the Kyrgyz (whom I assume to be the authors of the Yenisei script), I mean, of course, their Turkic-speaking ancestors, i.e., the Turkic-speaking part of that conglomerate of tribes from which, through successive hybridizations, the modern Kyrgyz national collective was formed—although, statistically speaking, this part was inferior to the non-Turkic-speaking elements (taken together), or even to at least one single Mongolian element. It should be noted that—despite the indisputability of this process of displacement of quite different nationalities—the specifics of this process (and thus the history of the Kyrgyz) remain far from illuminated and contain many controversial points for modern Oriental studies.”

This thesis of the scholar retains its scientific significance in contemporary Kyrgyz studies, where the process of ethnogenesis has not yet been definitively resolved and where several hypotheses are in contention.

In the dialectal analysis of the Kyrgyz language, Prof. Polivanov fully adopts the classification into four dialects established, in his words, by the “outstanding local researcher K. Tynystanov.”

Let us present another evaluation of K. Tynystanov's linguistic works, given in the same notebooks of E. D. Polivanov:

“The research work of Mr. Tynystanov deserves unconditional attention, as he independently approached the problem of morphology (i.e., the discipline studying the relationships and mutual causal dependencies of the phonological and morphological systems of language), which has only recently... begun to be developed by Western European linguists.”

For his scientific works, K. T. Tynystanov received the title of professor in 1936. Thus, the Institute had two professors, highly authoritative linguists who deeply respected and supported each other. However, the situation in the Institute was complicated. K. Tynystanov had to repeatedly acknowledge his ideological mistakes. E. Polivanov continued to remain under a “cap.” Despite the fact that he submitted the report on the expedition ahead of the deadline, he was “deducted” a day’s pay for “absence from the meeting of the Dungan sector on August 17” as if it were an absence without leave. At the same time, the professors were humiliatingly forced to endorse this order with their own signatures.

There was still a whole year left before his dismissal and arrest.

Discovery of Polivanov's manuscripts on Kyrgyz linguistics in the archives