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