the suffix "gan" is turkic ?

[lynxbythetv]

if "gan" is turkic then why does it feature among irish surnames ie reagan, maddigan, corrigan etc etc. fot example kurgan comes from the old turkic word korgan of which derives from the sound shifted korigan.

corrigan supposedly means spear in old irish celtic whereas kori means to protect in turkic.

are the irish turks ?

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

 

[A. Papadimitriou]

Or maybe the Turks are Celts? Gall, Ghur ?? etc.

For me the interesting thing is that Greek had two suffixes -then and -de, with ablative and allative use respectively that to me look similar to proto-Turkic -den/-ten and -de/-te suffixes (ablative, locative).

The pronouns of proto-Turkic also seem related to IE and Uralic ones. And the interrogative 'kim' (=who) etc.

 

[torzio]

Or maybe the Turks are Celts? Gall, Ghur ?? etc.

For me the interesting thing is that Greek had two suffixes -then and -de, with ablative and allative use respectively that to me look similar to proto-Turkic -den/-ten and -de/-te suffixes (ablative, locative).

The pronouns of proto-Turkic also seem related to IE and Uralic ones. And the interrogative 'kim' (=who) etc.

The turkic people come from Central asia .................Turkey the country was only invaded and took over for the first time by Turkic people just over 1000 years ago...........what do you mean they are celts
Turkey the country was called Anatolia before the turkic invasion and in the ancient world it was called Asia Minor

 

[Ygorcs]

Well, the combination of sounds g+a+n does not sound particularly distinctive for me to be exclusively attributable to one sole language family. The same combinations of phonemes or very similar phonemes can be used by totally unrelated language families as affixes or other kinds of particles, generally to serve different semantic purposes, but random coincidences also happen here and there.

Besides, there is the one little big problem: are those surnames even like that, ending in -gan, in Irish itself? You're comparing Anglicized versions of those Irish surnames. I'm not totally sure of it, but after googling a bit the first sources seem to indicate those surnames end in different ways in Irish itself in their original forms: Mac an Mhadaidh (Maddigan), Ó Ríogáin, Ó Corragáin. All of them also have very plausible Celtic etymologies and relate to Celtic clans, so looking to a remote Turkic connection (one ancient enough for nearly all evidences of it to have disappeared) because of one little ending particle that looks similar to one found in Turkic is just an unnecessary, though "creative", exercise. Linguistics is a lot about being parsimonious: if you have a less extraordinary and more feasible explanation that explains the phenomenon, you generally don't need to look further to much more imaginative and unlikely hypotheses.

 

[bigsnake49]

Well, the combination of sounds g+a+n does not sound particularly distinctive for me to be exclusively attributable to one sole language family. The same combinations of phonemes or very similar phonemes can be used by totally unrelated language families as affixes or other kinds of particles, generally to serve different semantic purposes, but random coincidences also happen here and there.

Besides, there is the one little big problem: are those surnames even like that, ending in -gan, in Irish itself? You're comparing Anglicized versions of those Irish surnames. I'm not totally sure of it, but after googling a bit the first sources seem to indicate those surnames end in different ways in Irish itself in their original forms: Mac an Mhadaidh (Maddigan), Ó Ríogáin, Ó Corragáin. All of them also have very plausible Celtic etymologies and relate to Celtic clans, so looking to a remote Turkic connection (one ancient enough for nearly all evidences of it to have disappeared) because of one little ending particle that looks similar to one found in Turkic is just an unnecessary, though "creative", exercise. Linguistics is a lot about being parsimonious: if you have a less extraordinary and more feasible explanation that explains the phenomenon, you generally don't need to look further to much more imaginative and unlikely hypotheses.

Thank you Ygorcs! People try their utmost to create connections that are not there.

 

[MOESAN]

if "gan" is turkic then why does it feature among irish surnames ie reagan, maddigan, corrigan etc etc. fot example kurgan comes from the old turkic word korgan of which derives from the sound shifted korigan.

corrigan supposedly means spear in old irish celtic whereas kori means to protect in turkic.

are the irish turks ?

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

Without being sure, I think that in a lot of Irish surnames we have rather suffixs 'ig-an', simply. To be checked.
in Brittonic dialects, -an is a diminutive.

 

[MOESAN]

Ygorcs showed that in certains names, the first part, -ig (written -iog) is not even a suffix but a root; he shows too that it can be -ag; he is right when he says these forms are english retranscriptions.
other example of the unreliability of english transcriptions: MacMurchadha > McMurrough, O'Murchadha > Murphy, see Murchadh written Murdoch in Scotland
&: in Gaelic (close to irish), -an is sometimes a plural suffix, which can be spelled -ain may be in some cases of declinsion.