My responses to comments
regarding NOSTRATIC.
Here are my responses to some of the comments in
the Google forum
regarding my paper
on the name NOSTRATIC:
1. Peter T. Daniels
wrote:
> Fer cryin' out
loud, the man who _invented_ the word "Nostratic,"
> Holger
Pedersen, explained that he, quite transparently, took it from
> the Latin word
_noster_ 'our'.
[Polat Kaya] For
crying out loud yourself. You must understand that
what has been
prepared and presented for your eyes (i.e., the
etymological
explanation of NOSTRATIC as coming from Latin NOSTER) is
not necessarily the
truth. The term "noster" meaning "our" is not so
transparent as you
imagine. Most likely its inventor knew much
more than what he
shared with everyone else. It is likely he knew that
the words of the
so-called European languages were manufactured from
Turkish by way of
anagrammatizing. Thus adding another word (i.e.,
Nostratic) to that
massive list was no problem at all. His invented
word
"NOSTRATIC" is well camouflaged with reference to the Latin word
"NOSTER"
which most likely, is a misdirection to cover up the real
source and the true
identity of the word NOSTRATIC. Let us not con
ourselves and the
world anymore by hiding behind some "linguistic"
jargon that quite
often does not represent the truth.
The explanation
that the term "NOSTRATIC", referring to an ancient
unknown language,
was derived from the Latin word "NOSTER" meaning
"our", is
not believable. It is just like countless words found in
western
dictionaries accompanied with a bogus etymology. The Latin
word
"NOSTER", meaning "OUR", does not refer to anything - let
alone a
language. When one
says: "OUR", the next question that comes to mind
is "Our
what?" The answer to this is a great big "blank stare".
Similarly,
"Nostratic" does not mean much either. But NOSTRATIC, when
deciphered
letter-by-letter as "ATIN TORCS", is an anagram of Turkish
expression
"ATIN TURKSE" (ADIN TURKÇE) meaning "YOUR NAME IS TURKISH"
which does refer to
a language and specifically to the TURKISH
language. This way
the term NOSTRATIC becomes meaningful in the
context it is used
in.
Although it may not
be common knowledge because of intentional
suppression,
Turkish is the ancient "proto" (from Turkish "BIRATA"
meaning
"One-father") language to at least the so-called
Indo-European and
Semitic languages. So, let us not quickly brush
away a very
important revelation that I am making just because it does
not suit the
western linguistic understanding. The Indo-European
languages are
face-to-face with a dilemma as far as their source is
concerned. And that
problem cannot be overcome by exclamations such as
"yup" or
"for crying out loud", etc.. I have said it before and I
will say it again
that there is plenty of linguistic evidence
indicating that
"ALL INDO-EUROPEAN AND SEMITIC LANGUAGES ARE
LANGUAGES
ARTIFICIALLY MANUFACTURED FROM TURKISH" whether the
linguists like it
or not. Ignoring this revelation will be like
keeping one's head
in the shade. There has been an amazing CON-JOB
regarding the TRUE
NATURE of these languages and their source.
LINGUISTS will
eventually have to accept this fact if they want to be
believable.
Of course it is the
Greek and Latin languages that are the source of
the problem facing
the Indo-European linguists because of the fact
that they
themselves were concocted from the ancient universal
language of
Turkish. This fact has been conveniently covered up.
There are those who
know it and those who don't.
2. Alessandro Riolo
wrote
> Yep, but reading
its messages, apart the obvious ROTFL, one could
> realize how
semantically powerful are the agglutinant languages :-)
[Polat Kaya]
Instead of talking cryptic, why don't you just
explicitly state
what you have in mind? What is it that causes you to
ROTFL? What
messages are you talking about when you write "reading
its messages?"
You may continue to ROTFL , or, you could try to be
"scholarly".
Yes Turkish is an
"agglutinative" language and yes it is very
powerful. For that
matter, Turkish can be called the "PERFECT"
language developed
over a very long period. But this is not the
reason why we are
finding the words of Indo-European languages as
anagrams of Turkish
words and expressions. The words of Indo European
languages turn out
to be anagrams/encryptions of Turkish words and
phrases because
they were intentionally done so - not because Turkish
happens to be
agglutinative. In other words, Turkish language words
and phrases were
usurped (i.e., stolen) by the manufacturers of
Indo-European
languages. This may not be to the liking of some
linguists but the
facts have a way of coming to the surface.
Anagrammatizing is
a form of ciphering and confusion. This confusion
most likely started
in Babylon and was continued jointly by the
ancient Greeks and
Latins. Hence easily available Turkish linguistic
resources were
exploited even up to this day. That is the only way
that the
Indo-European and Semitic languages (so-called inflected
languages) could
have taken the shape that they are in. In this regard
the whole world has
been conned by linguistic deceptions.
3. John H.
McCloskey wrote:
> I'm all for
enlisting in ROTFL, but still, doesn't it make finding
> anagrams a
little bit too easy if you get to use every language on
> earth? (Did
Nedim write Shakespeare?)
[Polat Kaya] NO,
NEDIM DID NOT WRITE SHAKESPEARE but SHAKESPEARE did
write a play called
"CORIOLANUS" which is very related to the Turkish
epic
"KOROGLU" and the name "ULU KÖR GÖZ" (distorted by ancient
Greeks
into the name
"LYCURGUS"). Although the source of "CORIOLANUS" is
attributed to
"The Life of Caius Marcius" in Plutarch's "Lives of
Noble Grecians and
Romans" [1], it is not necessarily the truth.
Because the Latin
names "CAIUS" (GAIUS) and "MARCIUS" are also
anagrams from
Turkish just like most of the ancient "pagan" European
names are. The name
"CAIUS", when deciphered as "AICUS" with C=K or G
is very much an
anagram of Turkish "AIKÖZ" (AYGÖZ) meaning "moon eye";
similarly, the name
"MARCIUS" is an anagram of Turkish MORKÖZ"
(MOR-GÖZ) meaning
"purple eye" referring to the Sun. Both of these
Latin names refer
to the "Moon and Sun" Gods of the ancient Turanian
Sky-God religion,
so-called "paganism". Of course the names are
distorted so that
their Turkic origin is obliterated.
Furthermore, the
name SHAKESPEARE is very much the same as the name
SAKESPHARES. [2] ,
i.e., the name of a SAKA (Iskit, Scyth, Scoth)
king. Even the name
SAXON, as in Anglo-Saxon, with X = KH, is very
much the Turkish
name "SAKA-HAN" meaning "Saka Lord" of Saka Turks.
Thus, it seems that
the great play-writer SHAKESPEARE had a Turkic
background which
could not be disclosed out of fear. Furthermore, it
seems that
SHAKESPEARE knew what was going on in Europe as far as the
source of the
European civilization was concerned. SHAKESPEARE wrote
the famed play
"CORIOLANUS" which is very much similar to the ancient
Turkish Epic
"KOROGLU". The name "CORIOLANUS", when decyphered as
"COROILU
ANS", with C = K, is an anagram of Turkish name "KOROGLU
HANUZ" meaning
"I am Lord KOROGLU/KÖROGLU" which is nothing but the
altered Turkish
name "KOROGLU" (KÖROGLU) spoken in form of 2nd person
plural case. While
the name refers to a Turkish Hero named "KÖROGLU"
it also refers to
the Sun-God and Moon-God of the ancient Turanian
Sky-God religion. The
correspondence is NOT due to coincidence.
REFERENCES:
[1] Margaret Loftis
Ranald, Ph.D., "SHAKESPEARE'S COROLANUS", Monarch,
Inc., New York,
1965., p. 10.
[2] Dr. Ilhami
Durmus "ISKITLER (SAKALAR)", Türk Kültürünü Arastirma
Enstitüsü,
Yayinlari : 141, Ankara, 1993, p. 76.
Best wishes to all,
Polat Kaya
03/05/2004
======================================================
T*ºm g**nderiler
"AN INSIGHT ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC""
Kimden:allingus
(allingus@...)
Konu:AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
Haber
Grupları:sci.lang
Tarih:2004-05-01
17:19:56 PST
AN INSIGHT ABAOUT
THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
By
POLAT KAYA
The name N0STRATIC
has been proposed and circulated as the name of an
ancient language
from which all languages are claimed to have been
derived. The name
N0STRATIC, however, turns out to be an
anagrammatized
Turkish expression which will be explained below.
GENESIS 11 states
that the world spoke one language which was confused
in BABYLON. In the
GENESIS story, the identity of that one language
that the world
spoke is omitted. Our research into existing
Indo-European and
Semitic languages has revealed that this ancient
language was
Turkish as spoken then. I have shown in many writings
with many examples
that the so-called Indo-European and Semitic
languages were
manufactured from Turkish words and phrases by way of
anagrams and
encryption indicating that that "one language which the
world spoke"
was Turkish. Great effort has been expended on the part
of the European and
Semitic language manufacturers to hide this fact.
This new term
NOSTRATIC is another attempt to bury the Turkic identity
of that ancient one
language the world spoke.
I had discussed the
name NOSTRATIC in one of my earlier writings but
as further insight
into this name, I offer the following:
The name NOSTRATIC,
when decrypted letter-by-letter as "ATIN TORCS",
is an anagram of
Turkish expression "ATIN T*úRKSE" (ADIN T*úRK*áE)
meaning "your
name is Turkish". In this anagram, the Turkish letter
"*á" has
been converted into letter "S" which is a common deception
used in European
languages starting from Greek, Latin and others. This
correspondence
between "NOSTRATIC" as a name for an ancient language
and the Turkish
phrase "ADIN T*úRK*áE" pointing to Turkish as that
ancient language is
not due to coincidence. It is evident that this
term NOSTRATIC was
generated using this Turkish expression as source
text. The
decryption "ADIN T*úRK*áE" identifies the true identity of
the language this
secretive word represents and further proves that
the identity of
that one ancient language was TURKISH. Contrary to all
the linguistic
confusion being discussed back and forth, it is clear
that the "one
language that world spoke" at the time of writing the
GENESIS was Turkish
and that the Indo-European and Semitic languages
were derived from
it. Instead of admitting that there was a Turkish
Era in ancient
world and the world language was TURKISH, linguists
have started
another wild-goose chase with this "NOSTRATIC" game which
adds to the
deception that has already been inflicted by the kabbals.
It is a game that
plays on Turkish words and phrases.
For Europeans who
have been so intimately involved in anagrammatizing
Turkish words and
phrases to generate words for their artificially
manufactured
languages, it should constitute no problem to add another
one to the list
(i.e., NOSTRATIC that is an anagram of Turkish phrase
"ADIN
T*úRK*áE" meaning "YOUR NAME IS TURKISH").
Best wishes to all,
Polat Kaya
25/04/2004
Bunu izleyen yeni
bir g**nderi g**nder
Kimden:Peter T.
Daniels (grammatim@...)
Konu:Re: AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
Haber
Grupları:sci.lang
Tarih:2004-05-02
04:27:45 PST
allingus wrote:
>
> AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
>
> By
>
> POLAT KAYA
>
> The name
N0STRATIC has been proposed and circulated as the name of an
> ancient
language from which all languages are claimed to have been
> derived. The
name N0STRATIC, however, turns out to be an
> anagrammatized
Turkish expression which will be explained below.
Fer cryin' out
loud, the man who _invented_ the word "Nostratic," Holger
Pedersen, explained
that he, quite transparently, took it from the Latin
word _noster_ 'our'.
--
Peter T. Daniels
grammatim@...
Bunu izleyen yeni
bir g**nderi g**nder
Kimden:Alessandro
Riolo (alessandro.riolo@...)
Konu:Re: AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
Haber
Grupları:sci.lang
Tarih:2004-05-02
06:29:13 PST
Peter T. Daniels,
from <grammatim@...>,
in
<news:4094DB32.3DD7@...>, wrote:
> Fer cryin' out
loud, the man who _invented_ the word "Nostratic,"
> Holger
Pedersen, explained that he, quite transparently, took it from
> the Latin word
_noster_ 'our'.
Yep, but reading
its messages, apart the obvious ROTFL, one could
realize how
semantically powerful are the agglutinant languages :-)
--
ale
http://www.sen.it
rara temporum
felicitate, ubi sentire
quae velis, et quae
sentias dicere, licet
Bunu izleyen yeni
bir g**nderi g**nder
Kimden:Peter T.
Daniels (grammatim@...)
Konu:Re: AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
Haber
Grupları:sci.lang
Tarih:2004-05-02
06:37:15 PST
Alessandro Riolo
wrote:
>
> Peter T.
Daniels, from <grammatim@...>,
> in
<news:4094DB32.3DD7@...>, wrote:
>
> > Fer cryin'
out loud, the man who _invented_ the word "Nostratic,"
> > Holger
Pedersen, explained that he, quite transparently, took it from
> > the Latin
word _noster_ 'our'.
>
> Yep, but
reading its messages, apart the obvious ROTFL, one could
> realize how semantically
powerful are the agglutinant languages :-)
Only if you
actually take the time to read all the way through ... do
you also read
F.G.'s messages about --whatever it is he's talking to
himself about?
--
Peter T. Daniels
grammatim@...
Bunu izleyen yeni
bir g**nderi g**nder
Kimden:John H.
McCloskey (elchipodesilicio@...)
Konu:Re: AN INSIGHT
ABAOUT THE WORD "NOSTRATIC"
Haber
Grupları:sci.lang
Tarih:2004-05-02
07:56:02 PST
>> Fer cryin'
out loud, the man who _invented_ the word "Nostratic,"
>> Holger
Pedersen, explained that he, quite transparently, took it from
>> the Latin
word _noster_ 'our'.
>Yep, but
reading its messages, apart the obvious ROTFL, one could
realize how
semantically powerful are the agglutinant languages :-)
I'm all for
enlisting in ROTFL, but still, doesn't it make finding
anagrams a little
bit too easy if you get to use every language on
earth? (Did Nedim
write Shakespeare?)
Happy days.
--JHM
Bunu izleyen yeni
bir g**nderi g**nder
©2004 Google