Suspicious loanwords between IE and Turkic

[Alpakut]

Yes of course Proto-Turkic existed before that perhaps as a part of another family but one investigating the borrowings of Turkic and IE should keep in mind that Proto-Turks didn't contact with PIE but with Iranic languages.

p.s. I know some Turks will think this is a euro-centric approach but I think that even an amateur linguist will admit that Turkic languages are not much different from each other. This could happen only if the split is recent.

We should also keep in mind about the possibility that Proto-Turkic may have been just another extra-Indoeuropean branch which split off very early in time from the main Indoeuropean bulk. There is high probability for this I think.

 

[Taranis]

Coming to your point, it is true that most researchers in Kazakhstan believe in a Turkic-linguality of bronze age steppe nomads.

I find that funny because, amongst other things, there's a common (Proto-Turkic) word for "iron" (modern Turkish "demir", Kazakh "temir", Uzbek "temir"). How could the Bronze Age steppe nomads supposedly have spoken Turkic, if the language could have been only spoken in the iron age?

 

[Alpakut]

I find that funny because, amongst other things, there's a common (Proto-Turkic) word for "iron" (modern Turkish "demir", Kazakh "temir", Uzbek "temir"). How could the Bronze Age steppe nomads supposedly have spoken Turkic could have been only spoken in the iron age?

Iron should not be necessarily restricted to Turkic nomads only, since steppe cultures have always been multiethnic, so it's quite probable that Indoeuropean-speaking nomads were the first to have handled iron. Moreover Hittites, which are known to have spoken an Indoeuropean language, were the first people that handled iron. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[arvistro]

I find that funny because, amongst other things, there's a common (Proto-Turkic) word for "iron" (modern Turkish "demir", Kazakh "temir", Uzbek "temir"). How could the Bronze Age steppe nomads supposedly have spoken Turkic, if the language could have been only spoken in the iron age?

It could be spoken before iron age with one of these scenarious:
a) they all took the word for iron from one of their tribes
b) they knew iron before iron age
c) their languages split at or after iron age

b is likely, for example wiktionary gives PIE word for "iron" - Proto-Indo-European *gʰelgʰ- (“iron”), although since word is only attested for Balto-Slavic branch, maybe it is rather proto-Balto-Slavic, but even proto-Balto-Slavic should be older than iron age. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dzelzs

 

[Taranis]

We should also keep in mind about the possibility that Proto-Turkic may have been just another extra-Indoeuropean branch which split off very early in time from the main Indoeuropean bulk. There is high probability for this I think.

Well, no offense, but this doesn't make the slightest sense, because Indo-European and Turkic have very different grammars. Indo-European languages are fusional, while Turkic is an agglutinative language.

Iron should not be necessarily restricted to Turkic nomads only, since steppe cultures have always been multiethnic, so it's quite probable that Indoeuropean-speaking nomads were the first to have handled iron. Moreover Hittites, which are known to have spoken an Indoeuropean language, were the first people that handled iron. Correct me if I am wrong.

You're missing the point here. Its clear that the word was part of the original vocabulary - before the language split up - as it adheres to the subsequent sound changes. Therefore, Proto-Turkic couldn't have split up any earlier.

Regarding arvistro, how does "they knew iron before the iron age" even make sense?

 

[Pax Augusta]

It must also be mentioned that Anna Dybo and colleague came to the conclusion that, I cite: The main conclusion is that the hypothesis of a steppe environment is more applicable for the Proto-Altaic population, whereas for Proto-Indo-Europeans a mountainous region seems more appropriate.

http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2013/08/indo-europeans-in-journal-of-language.html

Seems you already had a thread about this study just a few months ago -> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...s-were-the-Highlanders-who-lived-near-the-sea

More likely at some point in their history Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Altaic populations were closer.

We should also keep in mind about the possibility that Proto-Turkic may have been just another extra-Indoeuropean branch which split off very early in time from the main Indoeuropean bulk. There is high probability for this I think.

Honestly I don't think you're right.

 

[arvistro]

I think I read in a discussion or two related to linguistics that people knew iron ore before iron age. Just it was not used as metal.
Bog ore I think is visible on surface and has its name.

 

[oriental]

Iron should not be necessarily restricted to Turkic nomads only, since steppe cultures have always been multiethnic, so it's quite probable that Indoeuropean-speaking nomads were the first to have handled iron. Moreover Hittites, which are known to have spoken an Indoeuropean language, were the first people that handled iron. Correct me if I am wrong.

When I first saw your Haplogroup P-M45 I was surprise but as I was thinking about it at home I thought of the Karafet report which said that Haplogroup P was born in the Sundaland during the Ice Age 45,000 to 50,000 years ago. Haplogroup P is found in the Philippines. Now you are then the 'only' Haplogroup north of the Himalayas. From Hg. P emerged Hg. R and Hg. Q. Indo-Europeans are mostly associated with Hg. R1a. It is essentailly a language group. However, I find it hard to reconcile Hindi which is derived from Sanskrit which is of Subject-Object-Verb structure while English, French, German are Subject-Verb-Object structure. Structure must indicate a different people or tribal origin and the similarity of words only show they borrowed words. Anyways this is my cents worth.

 

[Alan]

His IP says Germany. There is no reason to doubt that there are no Turk-centrists in Kazakhstan.

If his IP says he is from Germany, than he is most likely Turk( very little ethnic Kazakhs in Germany but many Turks). And I think I know who he is. I had suspecions earlier from his claims and the way he writes. He is not that extreme as other Turkists. He listens to other opinions but his views are still as extreme as that of many Pan Turanist.

If he is who I am sure he is, than he is a Turk not a Kazakh.

 

[Alan]

When I first saw your Haplogroup P-M45 I was surprise but as I was thinking about it at home I thought of the Karafet report which said that Haplogroup P was born in the Sundaland during the Ice Age 45,000 to 50,000 years ago. Haplogroup P is found in the Philippines. Now you are then the 'only' Haplogroup north of the Himalayas. From Hg. P emerged Hg. R and Hg. Q. Indo-Europeans are mostly associated with Hg. R1a. It is essentailly a language group. However, I find it hard to reconcile Hindi which is derived from Sanskrit which is of Subject-Object-Verb structure while English, French, German are Subject-Verb-Object structure. Structure must indicate a different people or tribal origin and the similarity of words only show they borrowed words. Anyways this is my cents worth.

I don't think he is Haplo P-M45 he just list it that way. If he is, he could be so kind and show us the results from the company by blacking his name.

Like this as example.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=6224&d=1391459801

 

[oriental]

Thanks Alan. My, my. What people do on this forum.

 

[Alpakut]

It must also be mentioned that Anna Dybo and colleague came to the conclusion that, I cite: The main conclusion is that the hypothesis of a steppe environment is more applicable for the Proto-Altaic population, whereas for Proto-Indo-Europeans a mountainous region seems more appropriate.http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2013/08/indo-europeans-in-journal-of-language.html

Seems you already had a thread about this study just a few months ago -> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...s-were-the-Highlanders-who-lived-near-the-sea

Other presumed subfamilies of Altaic are undoubtedly out of the Indo-European range. Altaic in this case is a distorted code name for Turkic. This is a very important distinction criteria.

 

[Taranis]

Other presumed subfamilies of Altaic are undoubtedly out of the Indo-European range.

Sorry, but that does not make any sense. The Turkic languages, or the Altaic languages (by whatever definition) are demonstrably not (closely) related with the Indo-European languages, and certainly, the Turkic languages are not just another branch of Indo-European. The Turkic languages have a completely different grammatical structure, being agglutinative, while the Indo-European languages are fusional. This is why in the past, the "Ural-Altaic" hypothesis was popular, as the Uralic languages are also generally agglutinative.

Altaic in this case is a distorted code name for Turkic. This is a very important distinction criteria.

I'm sceptical on the inclusion of the inclusion of Japanese and Korean in Uralic (especially the former), but in my opinion, the case can be made for a "narrow" language family composed of the Turkic languages, Mongolian and Tungusic (e.g. Manchu). Even if you discard the Altaic concept completely, and consider the similarities of the Turkic languages with Mongolian and Tungusic to be the result of some kind of sprachbund, its clear that the Turkic languages have a close relationship with these, and not with Indo-European. You also have common religious concepts. For example, the modern Turkish word for 'god' (in the sense of the monotheistic God of the Abrahamic religions) is "tanrı", which is a cognate with the Mongolian word for "sky" (tenger), which is also, in the old Altaic religion (Tengriism), the eponymous sky god. You're also aware that one Turkic language, Yakutian (also called Sakha) is actually spoken in Far-Eastern Siberia.

So, no, Altaic is decisively not a "code word" for Turkic. Unless you consider the Mongols and Manchus to be Turks... :wink:

 

[Alpakut]

You also have common religious concepts. For example, the modern Turkish word for 'god' (in the sense of the monotheistic God of the Abrahamic religions) is "tanrı", which is a cognate with the Mongolian word for "sky" (tenger), which is also, in the old Altaic religion (Tengriism), the eponymous sky god.

This "Turkish" word for god is also known in Chinese: tian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tian

Tiān (天) is one of the oldest Chinese terms for heaven and a key concept in Chinese mythology, philosophy, and religion.

Chinese Bronze script character for tiān:

Ancient aliens?

You're also aware that one Turkic language, Yakutian (also called Sakha) is actually spoken in Far-Eastern Siberia.

True, but genetically they're related to Uralic peoples.

So, no, Altaic is decisively not a "code word" for Turkic. Unless you consider the Mongols and Manchus to be Turks... :wink:

I am aware of the fact that you won't expect Japanese or Korean horsemen during the Yamna period :wink: This is what I wanted to imply actually.

 

[Alpakut]

You also have common religious concepts. For example, the modern Turkish word for 'god' (in the sense of the monotheistic God of the Abrahamic religions) is "tanrı", which is a cognate with the Mongolian word for "sky" (tenger), which is also, in the old Altaic religion (Tengriism), the eponymous sky god.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengri#Mythology

Tengri was the main god of the Turkic pantheon, controlling the celestial sphere.^[11] Tengri is considered to be strikingly similar to the Indo-European sky god, *Dyeus, and the structure of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion is closer to that of the early Turks than to the religion of any people of Near Eastern or Mediterranean antiquity.^[12]

 

[Alan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengri#Mythology

Tengri was the main god of the Turkic pantheon, controlling the celestial sphere.^[11] Tengri is considered to be strikingly similar to the Indo-European sky god, *Dyeus, and the structure of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion is closer to that of the early Turks than to the religion of any people of Near Eastern or Mediterranean antiquity.^[12]

Sure about that? Anu, Teshub, Zeus, Mithra, Ahura Mazda just to name few.

 

[Alpakut]

Sure about that? Anu, Teshub, Zeus, Mithra, Ahura Mazda just to name few.

I am not entirely sure about your point, but if I remember right *Dyeus is the reconstructed form of Latin Zeus and many other related words like Celtic dēwos, Germanic Tīwaz, Sanskrit devá and so on. But what do Anu, Teshub, Mithra and Ahura Mazda have in common with Indo-European religion? Do you think that Near Eastern religions are closer to the Indo-European religion than with Turkic? There are moreover other suspicious relations between IE and Turkic like Common Turkic – Indoeuropean Heritage in Names of Plants, The Names of Metals in the Turkic and Indo-European Languages, and Turkic-Indo-European lexical correspondences. How do you interpret these relations?

 

[Taranis]

This "Turkish" word for god

You know, Turkish is actually a language (and its called that way in English), while Turkic denotes the language family.

is also known in Chinese: tian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tian



Chinese Bronze script character for tiān:
Ancient aliens?

I would be sceptical about the relationship of that Chinese word with Turkic. "Tian" is the modern, Mandarin Chinese reading of the word, and the Chinese language (or languages) has evolved considerably since the Bronze Age.

True, but genetically they're related to Uralic peoples.

Based on what?

I am aware of the fact that you won't expect Japanese or Korean horsemen during the Yamna period :wink: This is what I wanted to imply actually.

Are you suggesting that the Yamna Culture was Turkic (or Altaic?). Because that one makes no sense at all. The Yamna Culture is way too old, and way too far in the west for that to work out. As an example, the Yamna people certainly didn't have iron. Why would the Turkic languages have a common word for "iron"? :disappointed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengri#Mythology

Tengri was the main god of the Turkic pantheon, controlling the celestial sphere.^[11] Tengri is considered to be strikingly similar to the Indo-European sky god, *Dyeus, and the structure of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion is closer to that of the early Turks than to the religion of any people of Near Eastern or Mediterranean antiquity.^[12]

I'm a fence sitter there. I'm not entirely convinced that the Proto-Indo-European *dyeus and the Turkic "tengri" are related (even if the names are similar), but if there's a relationship, then the borrowing is from early Indo-European into Altaic (maybe from early Tocharian?). As I stated, Proto-Indo-European is the older language family (as I stated, the Turkic languages can be much better compared with the Germanic and Romance languages, in terms of relative age, and in terms of mutual similarity).

 

[Kristiina]

Excluding all linguistic viewpoints, I think that Central Asian Turkic peoples have preserved much better the steppe traditions than for example Western Europeans who are permeated by Mediterranean culture and whatever remains there are of proto-European cultures in Europe.

Languages and genes have been mixing for tens of thousands of years, and from my point-of view, proto-Turkic and proto-IE have many similarities and result from the cultural evolution in the Eurasian heartland.

There are many cognate words that may go beyond the recent Turkic or IE horizon. I do not believe that IE people were inventing tens of thousands of new words in the area ranging from Ireland to China only after the Bronze Age.

 

[Alan]

I am not entirely sure about your point, but if I remember right *Dyeus is the reconstructed form of Latin Zeus and many other related words like Celtic dēwos, Germanic Tīwaz, Sanskrit devá and so on. But what do Anu, Teshub, Mithra and Ahura Mazda have in common with Indo-European religion? Do you think that Near Eastern religions are closer to the Indo-European religion than with Turkic? There are moreover other suspicious relations between IE and Turkic like Common Turkic – Indoeuropean Heritage in Names of Plants, The Names of Metals in the Turkic and Indo-European Languages, and Turkic-Indo-European lexical correspondences. How do you interpret these relations?

This

Tengri is considered to be strikingly similar to theIndo-European sky god, *Dyeus, and the structure of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion is closer to that of the early Turks than to the religion of any people of Near Eastern or Mediterranean antiquity.

Please take a look at the descriptions of the Sky Gods Teshub, Taru, Anu. And you will understand why the statement above doesn't make sense. And Mithra, Ahura Mazda, Zeus are Indo European deities of Western Asian and Mediterranean antiquity by the meaning of it.

Even the genesis of Zeus is basically adopted from the genesis of Teshub.