Journals / Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: YZ (AI) ve Gelecek Perspektifler Özel Sayı

Artificial intelligence and ashik poetry: A comparative study of Ashik Veysel and Ashik Kodhanî

Yapay zekâ ve âşık şiiri: Âşık Veysel ile Âşık Kodhanî karşılaştırması

Samet Doykun(Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi)0000-0001-8231-270X
Pages
100–118
Publication Date
2025-12-07
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this respect, artificial intelligence is considered as a new “artificial minstrel” trying to speak to folk poetry.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study focuses on the reproduction of ashik poetry, which is a unique and deep-rooted form of expression in traditional folk literature, through artificial intelligence (AI) technologies; and evaluates the formal competencies and contextual limitations of these productions from a comparative perspective.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The artificial poems created by ChatGPT under the pseudonym “Ashik Kodhanî” are compared with the works of Ashik Veysel, one of the strongest representatives of 20th century folk poetry.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this respect, artificial intelligence is considered as a new “artificial minstrel” trying to speak to folk poetry.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:âşık · Âşık Veysel · şiir

Abstract

This study focuses on the reproduction of ashik poetry, which is a unique and deep-rooted form of expression in traditional folk literature, through artificial intelligence (AI) technologies; and evaluates the formal competencies and contextual limitations of these productions from a comparative perspective. The artificial poems created by ChatGPT under the pseudonym “Ashik Kodhanî” are compared with the works of Ashik Veysel, one of the strongest representatives of 20th century folk poetry. The comparison is based on themes such as love, nature, expatriation, longing and time, which are common themes in folk poetry. It has been observed that artificial intelligence poems are closer to the folk poetry tradition, especially in technical elements such as rhyme scheme, syllabic meter and formal structure. However, it has been determined that they lag behind human-generated poems in contentual dimensions such as emotional intensity, cultural memory, depth of expression based on experience, social criticism and irony. In addition, vital elements of oral culture such as improvised singing, mutual exchange and live performance are still inaccessible to artificial intelligence. As a result, artificial intelligence can contribute to the folk poetry tradition at the formal level; however, meaningful poetic production in terms of aesthetic, cultural and human depth is still based on human creativity. In this respect, artificial intelligence is considered as a new “artificial minstrel” trying to speak to folk poetry.

Özet

ÖZ Bu çalışma, geleneksel halk edebiyatı içinde özgün ve köklü bir anlatım biçimi olan âşık şiirinin, yapay zekâ (YZ) teknolojileri aracılığıyla yeniden üretimini konu almakta; bu üretimlerin biçimsel yeterliliklerini ve içeriksel sınırlılıklarını karşılaştırmalı bir perspektifle değerlendirmektedir. ChatGPT tarafından “Âşık Kodhanî” mahlasıyla oluşturulan yapay şiirler, 20. yüzyıl halk şiirinin güçlü temsilcilerinden Âşık Veysel’in eserleriyle karşılaştırılmıştır. Karşılaştırma, aşk, doğa, gurbet, hasret ve zaman gibi halk şiirinde sıkça yer bulan temalar üzerinden gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapay zekâ şiirlerinin özellikle kafiye düzeni, hece ölçüsü ve biçimsel yapı gibi teknik unsurlarda halk şiiri geleneğine yakınlaştığı gözlemlenmiştir. Ancak duygusal yoğunluk, kültürel hafıza, yaşantıya dayalı ifade derinliği, toplumsal eleştiri ve ironi gibi içeriksel boyutlarda insan üretimi şiirlerin gerisinde kaldığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca doğaçlama söyleyiş, karşılıklı atışma ve canlı icra gibi sözlü kültürün yaşamsal unsurları, yapay zekâ için hâlen erişilemez niteliktedir. Sonuç olarak yapay zekâ, halk şiiri geleneğine biçimsel düzeyde katkı sunabilir; ancak estetik, kültürel ve insanî derinlik açısından anlamlı bir şiirsel üretim hâlâ insan yaratıcılığına dayanmaktadır. Bu yönüyle yapay zekâ, halk şiiriyle konuşmaya çalışan yeni bir “yapay âşık” olarak değerlendirilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Doykun, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence and ashik poetry: A comparative study of Ashik Veysel and Ashik Kodhanî. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, Sayı: YZ (AI) ve Gelecek Perspektifler Özel Sayı, 100–118. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1742514

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (24)

  1. Ayverdi, İlhan (2011). Misalli Büyük Türkçe Sözlük. İstanbul: Kubbealtı Yayınları.
  2. Bekki, S. (2021). Halk Müziğinin Seyyar Radyosu Âşık Veysel. İstanbul: Muhit Kitap.
  3. Bin, H. (2023). Ethical challenges of artificially intelligent poetic works: subjectivity, ownership and cultural transformation. Journal of Namibian Studies, 33(S2), 4991-5005.
  4. Cunico, S., Munday, J. (2007). Translation and ideology: Encounters and clashes. London: Routledge.
  5. Dewan M. S. (2025). AI In Poetry Translation: Can Machines Capture Poetic Essence? International Journal of Social Science Humanity & Management Research ISSN (print) 2833-2172, ISSN (online) 2833-2180 Volume 04 DOI: 10.58806/ijsshmr.2025v4i5n08.
  6. Gümüş. İ. (2019). Âşık Veysel’in “Kara Toprak” şiirine ontolojik bir yaklaşım. Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(1),176-187.
  7. Hitsuwari, J., Ueda, Y., Yun, W., & Nomura, M. (2023). Does human–AI collaboration lead to more creative art? Aesthetic evaluation of human-made and AI-generated haiku poetry. Computers in Human Behavior.
  8. Katz, B., Morgenthau, J., & Rich, S. (2023). I am code: an artificial intelligence speaks (First edition.). Back Bay Books / Little, Brown and Company,
  9. Kaya, D. (2007). Ansiklopedik Türk Halk Edebiyatı Terimleri Sözlüğü. Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları.
  10. Linardaki, C. (2022). Poetry at the first steps of Artificial Intelligence. Humanist Studies & the Digital Age, 7.1 (2022) ISSN: 2158-3846 (online) http://journals.oregondigital.org/hsda/ DOI: 10.5399/uo/hsda/7.1.6.
  11. Malmkjaer, K. (2020). Translation and creativity: Perspectives on literary translation. London: Routledge.
  12. Murray, P., & Dorsch, T. S. (2000). Classical literary criticism. London: Penguin Books.
  13. Neelam, M. (2022). Neelam MahaLakshmi (2021) Aspects of Artificial Intelligence In Karthikeyan.J, Su-Hie Ting and Yu-Jin Ng (eds), “Learning Outcomes of Classroom Research” p:250-256, L’ Ordine Nuovo Publication, India. 978-93-92995-15-6.
  14. Oliveira, H. G. (2017). A Survey on intelligent poetry generation: Languages, features, techniques, reutilisation and evaluation. Proceedings of the 10th International Natural Language Generation conference, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, September 4-7, 2017, pp. 11-20.
  15. Rahmeh, H. (2023). Digital verses versus inked poetry: Exploring readers’ response to AI-generated and human-authored sonnets. Sch Int J Linguist Lit, 6(9): 372-382.
  16. Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.
  17. Singh, M. (2024). Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Poetry: Enhancing Creativity and Expression. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research (IJFMR), Volume 6, Issue 4.
  18. Stagnaro, Angelo. The Italian Jesuit Who Taught Computers to Talk to Us. January 28, 2017. https://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-italian-jesuit-who-taught-computers-to-talk-to-us. Access Date: July 2, 2025.
  19. Şatıroğlu, Veysel (1971). Dostlar Beni Hatırlasın. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
  20. Şatıroğlu, Veysel (1991). Dostlar Beni Hatırlasın. İstanbul: Özgür Yayın Dağıtım.
  21. Toosi, A., Bottino, A. G., Saboury, B., Siegel, E., & Rahmim, A. (2021). A Brief History of AI: How to Prevent Another Winter (A Critical Review). PET Clinics, 16(4), 449–469.
  22. Venuti, L. (2017). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  23. Wimmer, Mario. (2019). “Josephine Miles (1911–1985): Doing Digital Humanism with and without Machines.” History of Humanities, vol. 4, no. 2, www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/704850?journalCode=hoh. Access Date: July 1, 2025.
  24. Wu, Y. et all. (2016). Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translation. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.08144