Türkçenin -den, -dan, -ten
(then) , -tan (than) ve -de ... eski Grek dilinde...
--- In
b_c_n@yahoogroups.com, Polat Kaya <tntr@...> wrote:
Sayin Kamil Bey ve
Degerli Arkadaslar,
Kamil Bey'in
gönderdigi bu iletide pek ilginç bir özet yazi vardi.
Dimitrios
Georgiadis adli, Grek oldugu adindan belli olan dil
arastiricisi söyle
diyor:
"Studying the
basic features of Turkish and other relative languages,
I noticed the
following strange coincidence: Ancient Greeks used some
suffixes like -then
(meaning from a place, e.g. Athenethen:from
Athens) and -de
(meaning movement towards a place or even staying at
a place), which
resemble to the Turkic postpositions -den (from as
well) and -de (staying
at a place). Is this a sheer coincidence or
can we explain it
through the Nostratic theory? Is this theory
generally accepted?
Thank you."
Gördügünüz üzere
Dimitrios Georgiadis bu bir tesadüf müdür? diye
soruyor. Türkçenin
-den, -dan, -ten (then) , -tan (than) ve -de
(te), -da (ta)
eklerinin eski Grek dilinde bulunmasi, bence, bir
tesadüf eseri
olmayip, o zamanki eski Greklerin Türkçeyi çok iyi
bildiklerinin
isareti oldugu gibi, eski Grekceyi de o zamanlarda bir
evrensel dil olan
Türkçeden yapmis olduklarinin isaretidir. Ayrica,
Türkçenin bu
eklerinin de eski Grekler zamaninda ve olasilikla çok
daha öncesinden
gelistirilmis oldugunun da isaretidir. Dimitrios
Georgiadis"in
dediklerinin benim dediklerimi kanitlar durumda oldugu
açiktir. Çünkü,
M.Ö. 1. bin yilda gerek evrensel dil olan Türkçenin
ve gerekse evrensel
üçlü Gök-Tanri dini olan Tur/Türk dininin basina,
ve bu arada
Gök-Tanri Ogus-Ata'nin basina bir takim oyunlarin
oynanmasi
planlaniyordu. Nitekin gerek Musevilik ve gerekse
Hiristiyan
dinlerinin gelistirilmesiyle bu oyunlar tamamlanmis oldu.
Olasilikla, M.Ö. 1.
bin yilda eski Grekçe de Türkçeden ya yeni
yapilmis yahut
henüz yapilmakta idi.
Dolayisiyle eski
Grekçede bu Türkce eklerin bulunmasi bençe çok
dogaldir. Bu böyle
oldugu gibi, "NOSTRATIC" dil teoriesi, ancak
Türkçeyi
"BIR-ATA" dil olarak kabullendigi zaman bu gibi sorulari
izah edebilir hale
gelir ve bir yerlere varabilir; aksi takdirde,
Türkçeyi daha da
karanliklara gömmeyi hedefleyen bir teori olur.
Greek ve Akkadian
dilleri ile ilgili olarak su "gözlem" de çok
ilginçtir:
Prof. G. S. Kirk,
(Professor Emeritus of Greek at Cambridge
University)
"The Nature of Greek Myths" baslikli kitabinda, (sayfa
267) Ingilizce
olarak diyor ki:
"The very term
"Greek" is full of ambiguity. "Greek", like
"Akkadian",
denotes a language rather than a people. The
Greek-speaking
people began to enter the Greek peninsula shortly
before 2000 B.C.,
but they found there an indigenous population that
already had
cultural and perhaps linguistic connection with Asia
Minor. ...."
Prof. Kirk'in
yukarida aslini verdigim kendi ifadesi bazi çok önemli
hususlari gün
isigina getiriyor. Söyle ki:
1)
"Greek" ve "Akkadianlar" bir "millet" degilmisler
ve "millet"
olmayanlarin da
kendilerine ait bir dilleri olmaz veya olamaz. Zira
"millet"
olmadan dil olmaz. Prof. Kirk de zaten bunu söylüyor fakat
çok kapali bir
dille söylüyor.
2) Prof. Kirk,
"Greek" ve "Akaddian" bir dildir dedigine göre
ve bu dilleri
konusanlarin da bir millet olmadiklarini isaretledigine
göre, bu diller
daha önce yoktular anlami çikiyor. Sayet bu diller
daha önce
"yok" idiyseler, ve simdilerde de var olduklarina göre
onlar sonradan
gelistirilmis diller olmalidirlar. Yani bu dillerden
önce evrensel
olarak konusulan bir dil vardi. Bunun böyle oldugunu
GENESIS 11 zaten
söylüyor.
Dil yapmak kolay
bir is olmadigina göre bu dillerin eskidenberi var
olan bir dilden
yapilmis olmalari çok daha olasidir.
Nitekim,
"Akkadian" dilinin Sumerceden kirilarak (anagram) yapildigi
bilinen bir
gerçektir. Bu bilgiye ek olarak ben de diyorum ki
gerek "Grekçe
ve gerekse Latince ve bu dillerden üretilmis oldugu
söylenen diger
Avrupa dilleri de gerçekte çok eski bir evrensel dil
olan"Türkçeden
kirilarak (anagram yoluyla) yapilmislardir". Demek ki
birçok dile kaynak
dil olan Türkçenin "BIR-ATA" yahut "BIR-ANA" dil
oldugu itiraf
edilmemektedir. Bunca yazilarimda iki yüze yakin
çesitli sözcügün
ad-olgusunu yaparak izah ettim. Bütün bunlar
iddiamin
dogrulugunu kanitlayan isbatlardir. Unutulmamasi gerekir ki
her dilde
tanimlanmis olan sözcükler bir kavramin adidirlar ve o
kavramin kimligini
ve mahiyetini çok dogru olarak tanimlarlar. Onlar
bir nevi tas üstüne
yazilmis yazitlar gibidirler. Benim sizlere
arzettigim bu
"dil" yazitlarinin çözümüdür.
3) Prof. Kirk'in
ifadesinde kullandigi "Greek-speaking people"
deyimi oldukca
yaniltici bir ifadedir. Aslinda eski Yunanistana
gelen ve Latinlerce
Graecus ( < çok olasilikla "Kara-Aycuz" (Kara-
Aycuyuz) anlaminda
Türkçe deyimden yapilmis bir ad) ve kendilerince
Graikos (<
"Kara-Ay-Köz/Göz" anlaminda Türkçe deyimden yapilmis bir
ad) diye bilinen
eski Grekler bu gün "Greek" diye bilinen bir dili
konusarak eski
"Pelasgian" illerine gelmediler. Onlar
eski
"Yunanistana" gelirken "KIRIK / GIRIK" yani ne oldugu
anlasilamayan bir
dille geldiler. Diger bir deyimle, geçtikleri her
Tur/Türk ilinden
aldiklari dili "kirik dökük konusarak" veya çok
olasilikla
"onu-kirma" (anagram) yoluyla degistirerek kolaylikla
anlasilmayan bir
dille geldiler. Pek çok bati sözlükleri eski
Greklerin dilini
"anlasilmayan" bir dil olarak tanimlarlar. Ve
onlarin konusmalari
günün Türkçesine nazaran o kadar "kirik dökük"
olmali idi ki ancak
o dile "GIRIK" anlaminda "Greek" denebilirdi.
Nitekim o ad ile de
günümüze kadar gelmistir.
Dikkatle incelenmesi
ve ayrica kendi arastirmalarinizi yapmaniz için
sunulur. Kamil
Beyin alintilarinda baska çok ilginç olanlari da var.
Onlari da firsat
buldukca ayrica isaretliyecegim.
Kalin saglikla.
Selam ve sevgiler,
Polat Kaya
allingus2001 wrote:
>
> Merhaba
Arkadaslar,
>
> Bu sorular The
Linguist bilgi topluluklarinda yer almistir, bazilari
> hem
toplulugumuzu hem de uyelerimizi yakindan ilgilendiriyor
> olabilir,
ilginize.
>
> Sevgiler,
> Kamil
>
> From: Douglas
Lamont <jaykey@g...>
>
> I have heard
of a work (written perhaps about 50 years ago?) by a
> Turkish
linguist, comparing Turkish(/Altaic?) with Sumerian.
>
> The work was,
I understand, something of a Turkish-nationalist
polemic and roundly
dismissed by linguists everywhere, though it was
supposed to have
demonstrated more Sumerian-Altaic cognates than R.A.
Miller's
<i>Japanese and the Other Altaic Lanuages</i> did Japanese-
Altaic cognates.
>
> My question:
Can anyone tell me the name of this Turkish linguist
and his book?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: jacki
tate <puffie@h...>
>
> I'm studying
Turkish, and having trouble determining when certain
> consonants
become voiced in certain noun forms. For example:
>
damaT>damaDin, but demeT>demeTin also, renk>renGin, but tank>tanKin
> Is it at all
predictable?
> Can anyone
help, or at least point me in the right direction?
> Any assistance
would be appreciated!
>
> J. Tate
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: M.Ertan
GOKMEN <gokmen@h...>
>
> I'ld like to
learn linguists' name who study on comperative phonetic
> structures of
Korean and Turkish. Also, can you inform me if you
have the lists of
books and papers about this subject?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Josh
Gillie <jgillie@m...>
>
> Why is it that
all indo-europian languages are move more twords an
> isolational
grammer duch as in chinese and other related
> asian
languages. and not tword and aggulating such as modern
turkish?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From:
Dimitrios Georgiadis <spdi@e...>
>
> Studying the
basic features of Turkish and other relative
languages, I
noticed the following strange coincidence: Ancient
Greeks used some
suffixes like -then (meaning from a place, e.g.
Athenethen:from
Athens) and -de (meaning movement towards a place or
even staying at a
place), which resemble to the Turkic postpositions -
den (from as well)
and -de (staying at a place). Is this a sheer
coincidence or can
we explain it through the Nostratic theory? Is
this theory
generally accepted?
> Thank you.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Kathy
Hansen <khansen@g...>
>
> I'm looking
for a list or some place where languages are identified
> as being
either stress-timed or syllable-timed. I can find bits and
> pieces of
information here and there, about specific languages, but
> I'm wondering
if there's one place which identifies languages as
> such. I'm
looking for this information for my master's thesis, and
> I'm not having
much success.
>
> At the moment,
I would say that the languages I'm interested in are
> Arabic,
Spanish, Portuguese, (Congo), Hebrew, Japanese, Korean,
> Lithuanian,
French, Russian, German, Mandarin, Thai, Turkish,
>
(Turkmenistan). (This is based on the list of countries that
students are from
at an English Language Institute.) For about four
of these languages,
I have information.
>
> Any help you
can give would be appreciated. Thank you.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Forrest
K. Ballou <texkelt@h...>
>
> I've heard
that the Korean language is more closely related to
> Turkish than
it is to Chinese or other oriental languages. Is this
> true, and why?
Also do Northwest Indian and Korean languages have
> a common root
in Tonguska?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Murat
Yildirimgec <zushan@s...>
>
> I would like
to get in touch with a linguist for the development of
> Turkish
phonemes in speech recognition programs.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Mauricio
<mopc77@h...>
>
> I study for
pleasure and curiosity many languages of Europe and
Asia. Although I of
course do not believe that traces of the original
human language
vocabulary can be identified, I am puzzled with the
similarities
between the Indo-european words for "mother" and the
non indo-european
ones. Like in Chinese it's "ma" or "mu qin", in
Turkish
"anne", in Hebrew "em" and in Basque "ama". The
word for
father tends to be
something like "baba" or "aba" in many languages
too. Anthr one is
that the word "man" tends to be "adam" in languages
the Middle East,
which resembles Indo-european "atem"= "breath,
soul".Do
linguists have an answer for that similarity?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Antonio
Caridad Salvador <acaridad@a...>
>
> It`s quite
difficult to find information about the origin of turkish
> language. Did
all the turks spoke the same language before invading
> the Middle
East? or did they spoke separated languages? when did
these languages
become separated? which are the first text that can be
considered as
turkish? I mean, it can be considered the same
language as that
spoken in Ankara or Istanbul. When became this form
of turkish
different from other turkish dialects?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Kate
<kpotmail@y...>
>
> I have read
that Finnish, Hungarian, Turkish, and Basque are all
> agglutinative
languages. (Please correct me if I am wrong). I was
> wondering
which other languages spoken today are considered to be
> agglutinative.
> If it's
easier, feel free to answer this question with links to
sites that list the
agglutinative languages. Thanks.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: korcan
yayla <korcan@e...>
>
> Is it true
that hungarian,finnish and turkish have got the same
>
origin?Beceause it has been said that there are many similarities
> among these
three languages.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ---------------------------------
>
> From: Sencan
Tasci <Tascis_1@h...>
>
> I am a student
in Linguistics in Germany and I am writing a
> thesis about
Turkish-German codeswitching among Turkish adolescents
in Germany who are
balanced bilinguals.
>
> My question
is: Does anyone know if there has been written something
> about this
earlier? It seems that I am the first to be interested in
> this subject.
>
> I would also
appreciate references of articles on codeswitching in
> general.
>
> Thanks in
advance.
>
> Sencan Tasci.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: fatma
<daglar@p...>
>
> What is your
opinion on Ural-Altaic unity? Do you consider Turkish
to be related to
Finnish and Hungarian - due to its agglutinative
nature and vowel
harmony?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Ruslan
Mehdiyev <mehdiyra@b...>
>
> Hi guys.
>
> I am
experiencing problem with finding literature about turkish
> loadwords in
english language. Could you recommend books or articles
> about the
subject.
>
> Sincerely
yours,
> Ruslan Mehdiyev
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Lyrr
Descy <Lyrrd@p...>
>
> I would like
someone to settle an argument for me. Or maybe it
can't be settled?
My boyfriend, who studied linguistics more
recently than
> I did (and
perhaps in greater depth), insists that it is misleading
> to call a
friend of ours a "linguist". This person speaks many
> languages, and
used to teach Arabic, Turkish and Bulgarian, among
> other things,
at a university. He sometimes describes himself as
> an "Orientalist".
>
> My boyfriend
insists that since Chomsky has revolutionized the study
> of
linguistics, it is now more properly a science and no longer much
> related to
language arts. He claims that today the word "linguist"
> should be
reserved for people who are involved with linguistics per
> se, including
in the area of information technology.
>
> How do you
"linguists" feel about this?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: TIMUR
ARKUN <TIMUR.ARKUN@O...>
>
> I AM TURKISH
AND 30 YEARS OLD AND WORK IN A PRIVATE BANK. ONE
> INTERESTING
THING IN THE TURKISH WORDS THAT PHONOLOGICALLY THEY
> FOLLOW A
PATTERN.FOR EXAMPLE,IF A WORD STARTS WITH A
>
SILLABLE,INCLUDING A,I,O OR U,THE NEXT SILLABLES IN THE SAME WORD
MUST INCLUDE A,I,O
OR U BUT NEVER E,?? OR ?AND SIMILAR RULES
> PRAVAIL(THESE
ARE VAILD IN TURKISH ONLY IF THE WORD IS TOTALLY
> TURKISH NOT A
BORROWED ONE.)I WANT TO LEARN THE REASON(S) OF
> LAZINESS
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Mustafa
Soykut <soykut@m...>
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I would like
to know the answers to three separate questions:
>
> 1. We know
that there is a common lexicon between Vedic Sankrit and
> the ancient
Mitanni language. Was the Mitanni language a relative of
> Sanskrit or
was the it merely a matter of common lexicon? And if
they were indeed
relatives, what does it tell about the Aryan
migrations?
> There are some
Indians claiming that the Vedic Indians had colonized
> the Middle
East, hence the similarity!! Do you find this a plausible
> explanation?
>
> 2. The second
question is about the first record of a language that
we might call
Turkish or proto-Turkish and dates.
>
> 3. The third
question concerns the origin of the dravidian
> languages. Is
there any linguistic evidence to prove and/or disprove
> that the
so-called Arians pushed the Dravidians down south and that
> they
originally inhabited north India?
>
> Thank you very
much.
>
> Yours
sincerely,
> Dr. Mustafa
Soykut
> Middle East
Technical University,
> Ankara, TURKEY
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: ENOS
<ODYSSES2001@H...>
>
> This is a
question about the classefication of langauges into
> super-families
and the origions of langauges. Most of the stuff that
> I've read
seems to be in agreement that langauge apeared at the time
> of or proir to
the great advances in culture and in technology of
the Paleothic
Superior about 40,000 years ago, since it seems that
> langauge must
of been present for the transmission of reletively
> advanced
techniques and the begannings of symbolic thought in the
> birth of artistic
expression. As this was proir to the expension of
> the Homo
Sapiens out of a very small range in Eastern Africa,
wouldnt it seem
that all of the worlds langauges must eventaully be
related back to a
single mother langauge that appeared before the
large scale
> migrations
which resulted in the later linguistic and genetic
>
diversification of the species. Is this possible, or am I missing
> something
here? If this is possibly correct, how is that such basics
> as numeric
systems have undergone such radical alterations over
time, and for
various langauges to have such drastically different
syntaxes and
grammers?
>
> On a smaller
scale, presuming that people were utilsing langauge at
> the time of
the arrival of the first humans in the Americas, wouldnt
> all the
langauges native to the New World be descended from a single
> langauge or
small numbetr of related langauges spoken by a small
> group of
original colonists that later diversified over time with
geo- graphical
diffusion. Yet their seems to be little evidence for
> grouping these
langauges into a single family. How is it possible
for so many
langauges that must share a common root, to become
completly unrelated
over time? If I remember correctly, based on
information I read
in the French magazine "Science Et Avenir", the
AmerIndains were
> a population
extremely similair genetically, at least copmered to
the groups making
up for example the Indo-eroupean family. How is that
> such a tightly
related population,one with a reletively short
history (back to
the land bridges of the last ice age) come to such a
variety of
different, un related langauges?
>
> Lastly, how
much credibelity seems to be currently attached to the
> establishment
of a large langauge family attaching Finnish,
Hunerian, etc to
Turkish and Mongolion and finally to Japenese and
Korean?
>
> Forgive if
youve been through all this before. If you could clear up
> these
questions a little for me Id really appreciate it. Thank you
for your time.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Ben
Cohen <bcohen@w...>
>
> link of
korean, finnish, hungarian, and turkish origin
> is there
anything substantial to the claim that they're all related?
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Chris
Barley <christopherbarley@h...>
>
> In what ways
has the Arabic language influenced Turkish?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Priska
Trauernicht <ptrauernicht@g...>
>
> The Ethnologue
counts seven languages for Usbekistan. Much can be
> found about
the planning efforts for Uzbek as the national language
> but hardly
anything on what the policy is for the other languages
> (Tajik,
Turkish, Crimean Turkish, Spoken Uzbeki Arabic, Bukharik,
> Judeo-Crimean
Tatar and Karakalpak). How well are these surveyed and
> are there any
efforts made to protect and develop them?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: Hikmet
Unlu <telehikmet@h...>
>
> My questions
regard my native language. I am quite aware that you
> might not know
Turkish; yet on the other hand, I do not have the
> professional
tools of a linguist to examine what I know.
>
> My first
question is about the "r" dropping which occurs almost
> always in
causal speech but never in written language. For
> example,
"geliyordum" is pronounced like "geliyodum." Thus I find it
> useless to
write the unnecessary "r" in my writings. If such a thing
> called
language change exists, why didn't the "r" drop in the
written
> language as
well?
>
> This second
question intrigues me substantially in every language.
> What happens
when there are double consonants such as when an "n"
> follows
another "n" as in "anne"? Are the two consonants pronounced
> separately or
do they merge to a long "n"?
>
> My third
question is about the "de" in Turkish which means "too" in
> English.
"Ben de geldim" means "I came too", but when we want to
> say "He
came too" it becomes "O da geldi." The same word has two
> written forms
in order to sustain vowel harmony with the previous
> word. Does
this kind of thing happen in other languages as well? Not
> in English or
German, that I know.
> Thanks for
your concern.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> Hi,
> I know that
there are many borrowed words in Turkish and I think
that Turkish is
today under the influence of many languages and this
> causes main
changes in Turkish language structure. Recently I've
come across a menu
called McDonalds Turkish and realize that how
Turkish words are
being changed in a funny way. There were words such
as; big Mac> biq
Mak shake > Seyk double > dabl
> My question is
how these foreign words generally changed
> phonological
and morphological structure of Turkish?
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
---------------------------------
>
> From: hikmet
<telehikmet@h...>
>
> First of all
hello, I am a 21-years-old Turkish student going to
> college in
Canada. I've taken several linguistics courses and
learned all about
the intriguing subjects such as phonology, accent,
and critical age. I
have prnounced my first English word just a few
years ago, which is
long after what you call the critical age;
however, not
> resenting the
fact that many people claim it is impossible
> to
"acquire" a language, not "learn" it; I believe the human
nature
> inherently
demands for the unreachable. I don't want to sound as a
> foreigner with
an accent. I don't want to take accent reduction
> courses and
make my speech easy to comprehend for the native
> speakers, my
speech is very clear right now. What I want to do is, I
> want to sound
"exaclty" like a native speaker sounds, so even
> Professor
Higgins can not distinguish between my accent
> and a native
speaker's. The tecnique I am using is my own creation
and it's by no
means ground-breaking, yet it works. Every night
before I go to bed,
I listen to the Cnn straining my ears, with my
eyes closed,
>
"only" listening to the delivery and not the content. After the
> thirty-minute
routine, I will end up by not remembring a single word
> of what I
listened; however I manage to reveal the intonation
pattern
> a native
speaker would use. I got better in a month and I am still
> working on it.
Thanks a lot for reading this, and I know I have not
> asked a
question, so I can't expect an answer, but I'll be extremely
> happy if you
could comment back on the tecnique I am using, I also
> expect a final
word on if it will ever be possible to fully acquire
> the language
by this method. I would be very pleased if you had any
> tips to share
too, or I would be very welcome to hear almost
anything from a
linguist regarding this issue: my e-mail is
> telehikmet@h...
> -many thanks
for your time-