RE: [bcn_2003] About claims
of Mr.Polat Kaya (Edo Nyland - III)
--- In b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com, "Edo
Nyland" <edonon@i...> wrote:
How many examples
do you have?
Thousands. Get my
book Linguistic Archaeology (541 pages) and you
will see that all
words used by Shakespeare were formulaically
agglutinated with
the use of Basque. No, I didn’t do all of
Shakespeare’s
words, just three chapters devoted to English. The
chapter entitled
“Are words a Shorthand?” contains a detailed
tutorial, so you
can do the decoding yourself.
I don’t know where
you are but I will be on 5 day speaking tour on
this subject at the
Univ. of Wisconsin in Madison, in October. If you
want a copy of the
book review by Prof. Gardner, I’ll gladly send it
to you by email.
Atone,
ato-one
atondu – onezkoak
to arrange –
reconciliation
-----------------------------------------------
-----Original
Message-----
From: H.M. Hubey
[mailto:HubeyH@M...]
Sent: Tuesday, July
29, 2003 9:10 AM
To:
b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:
[bcn_2003] Fw: [Nostratica] Re: About claims of Mr.Polat
Kaya
There is one thing
that your examples remind me of.
And they are the
alleged Iranian words from which the Scythian, Sacae,
Sarmatian etc words
are derived. I guess both are either good or bad
or somewhere in
between.
How many examples
do you have?
Quantity does
matter.
Edo Nyland wrote:
I think we have to
go back one more step, to the language which
underlies all
Indo-European, Semitic and Turkish languages. This
ancient language is
now well accepted in Europe as being an earlier
form of Basque, the
language spoken during the thousands of yeras the
Goddess religion
held sway over North Africa, western Asia and all of
Europe. Colin
Renfrew wrote in "The Human Inheritance" (1999): "the
Basque language may
be regarded as the only early and indigenous
language of
Europe" (p.27). Many linguists in Germany have now
endorsed this
position. This also means that there is and never was,
a family of
Indo-European languages because they were all invented by
religious
linguists, even Sanskrit. My book "Linguistic Archaeology"
(2001) explains it
all in detail, how the monks made up all languages
of Europe using the
Basque dictionary, without any exception. My book
may be obtained by
going to: www.trafford.com/robots/01-0069.html
<http://www.trafford.com/robots/01-0069.html>
Most I-E words have
an encoded Basque sentence built in, written in
shorthand and
describing the meaning of the word. My book gives many
hundreds of
examples of how the decoding process works. The modern
Basque-English
dictionary by Gorka Aulestia is perfectly adequate to
decode most I-E
words. The encoding was done in such a mathematical
format that it may
be possible to recover the hidden sentence by
using a computer.
To start this process we have now digitized
Aulestia's Basque
dictionary, which is the first big step in our
lexicon-statistical
project. The Turkish language may have been made
up similarly and
not all that long ago, but I don't know what system
was used or who did
it. That may be my next project. Turkish
certainly was not
used to make up many I-E words.
Edo Nyland,
edonon@i...
<mailto:edonon@i...> ,
Sidney, B.C.,
Canada.
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original
Message-----
From: Polat Kaya [
mailto:tntr@C...]
Sent: Monday, July
28, 2003 7:40 AM
To:
b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re:
[bcn_2003] Fw: [Nostratica] Re: About claims of
Mr.Polat
Kaya
Dear friends,
alingus forwarded a
response of Mr. Mark Hubey as identified below.
Here I respond to
its certain portions.
Subject: [bcn_2003]
Fw: [Nostratica] Re: About claims of Mr.Polat Kaya
Date: Thu, 24 Jul
2003 12:19:18 +0300
From:
"allingus" <allingus@u...> <mailto:allingus@u...>
Reply-To:
b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bcn"
<b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com>
Mark Hubey said:
"Ok, let's
see. Somewhere I read that there are approximately one
million acronyms in
English mostly technical stuff like LEM, DB,
radar, etc. But
this is appropriate for this era since we have
invented so many
things that we need to name. Surely nobody wants to
write "lunar
excursion module" all the time so we simply put LEM. But
this era is this
era and 5,000 years ago things were different."
Polat Kaya: Mark
Hubey is mixing apples and oranges. I was not
talking about
acronyms at all. I was explaining that when there is
intentional human
interference in language development (as in
intentional
anagrammatization of Turkish words and phrases to come up
with new English
words), there is no probability involved. Somebody
makes a decision to
manufacture a new English word. He takes a
Turkish word or
expression for a particular concept that is related to
the new word he is
trying to manufacture, shuffles it up, drops a
vowel here, changes
a consonant there, rearranges as he pleases until
he comes up with
what appears to be an English-like word that also
effectively
conceals the Turkish source. For example, take the Turkish
word
"APATIR" meaning "he is father". English anagrammatized this
Turkish word to
come up with "FATHER". German took this Turkish word
and came up with
"VATER". Italian and Spanish took the Turkish word
and came up with
"PADRE". Persian took the Turkish source and came up
with
"PEDER". In all cases, the resulting manufactured words are
based on Turkish
"APA" meaning "father" plus Turkish suffix "TIR"
and
its variations
meaning "it is". In the process, the original meaning
was altered (i.e.,
the original Turkish phrase "APATIR" meant "IT IS
FATHER" but
the new words were assigned the meaning "FATHER"). As you
can see,
probability plays no part in this process whatsoever.
And yes indeed
5,000 years ago things were different and 2,500 years
ago things started
to change. That is why we have what we have now.
It is not the same
world anymore as was the case during the first
millennium B.C. and
earlier.
Mark Hubey said:
"Words are
normally derived analogically e.g. via analogical
extension. Nobody
sat around campfires drinking wine and inventing new
words because there
was no pressing need for it."
Polat Kaya:
Evidently there was quite a pressing need for it in
Babylon and other
similar centers for such activities. It did not
have to be done
around campfires while consuming wine. The purpose
would be much
better served if it was done in complete secrecy and
behind closed doors.
Mark Hubey said:
"So nobody
anagrammatized anything either."
Polat Kaya: Not
only do you not know that, but you are also very
wrong on that.
Linguistically, we are living in an artificially
altered world. We
have all been taken for a great ride, of course,
including the
linguists. I gave many word evidences to demonstrate how
the simple
technique of "anagrammatizing" Turkish words and phrases
played a very great
role in shaping many of the present world
languages,
particularly Indo-European and Semitic languages. All
things point to
that alteration and takeover.
Mark Hubey said:
"But
probability does play a great part in showing that these
exercises are
useless."
Polat Kaya: Nothing
of the kind. The fact that you have never tried to
understand the
formation of words as I have means that you are not in
a position to
dismiss what I am saying. Contrary to denials, what you
call "useless
exercises" are in fact huge revelations that are
unexpectedly
revealing the Turkishness of the ancient world.
Mark Hubey said:
"One can take
a word, take apart its letters/sounds and create new
words from it. And
because there are so many possibilities, the
probability that
this particular reorganization of the sounds is
likely easy and
thus meaningless."
in response to my
earlier:
"In the
so-called Greek mythology, the name POSEIDON is the god of
seas, waters, etc.
I say that this so-called Greek god was nothing
but the anagrammatized
name of Deniz-Han of the Turanians. How so? I
will show you how.
When one rearranges the name POSEIDON as
DENIS-OPO, it is
readily seen that it is the anagram of Turkish
"DENIZ-APA"
meaning "father of sea". Now I claim that this is not a
normal change of
the name. As you can see, probablity played no part
in this
transformation."
Polat Kaya: You are
wrong again and way out. Probability has nothing
to do with a person
taking a Turkish phrase such as "DENIS-APA" and
willfully changing
it into "POSEIDON". If what you say was possible,
why dont you, for
example, try to take the name "POSEIDON", rearrange
it and get the name
"HERMES" out of it. I bet you cannot do it no
matter how much
probablity you use. Or similarly take the name
"HERMES"
and get "DENIS-HAN" out of it using your probablity theorem.
Let us see if you
can do it. But I can tell you that you can get
Turkish
"ERMESH" (ERMISH) from "HERMES" without the use of
probability
- and with no
problem.
As another example,
take the Turkish name "HIZIR". HIZIR is regarded
as
"ERMESH" immortal meaning "he who has reached godliness".
In his
Turkish cultural
role he is just like "HERMES". HIZIR can be present
at any place at any
time. HIZIR is defined as "legendariy person who
attained
immortality by drinking from the water of life." The Turkish
expression:
"Hizir gibi yetish" means "to come as a god send; to come
to the rescue at
the right moment". HERMES, as defined in the
so-called Greek
mythology, is also god's messenger and can be at any
place at any time.
Thus, Greek "HERMES" and Turkish "ERMESH" have a
lot in common. In
fact from the word formation point of view, all one
has to do is take
the letter "H" of Turkish "ERMESH" and bring it to
the front, to get
the name "HERMES". This is not due to coincidence
and it is highly
likely that this is what the Greeks did. Therefore,
you cannot discard
the possibility that Turkish "ERMISH" or "HIZIR"
was not
anagrammatized into "HERMES". Probability has nothing to do
with Turkish
"ERMISH" being taken over by Greeks.
I am afraid you and
most other linguists are very wrong in your
perception of
words, particularly Greek, Latin and other Indo-European
words and even
Semitic words. Let me give you another example. What is
the probability
that the so-called Latin word "MILLENNIUM" is not an
anagram of Turkish
expression "MIN ILLI ANUM" (bin yilli an'um)
meaning "I am
a time period of one thousand years"? As you know, that
is what a
"MILLENNIUM" is, i.e., a period of one thousand years. Note
that the same
lettering exists in both cases. How come? What is the
probability of this
correspondence taking place between two supposedly
independently
developed languages?
Mark Hubey said:
"So, again you
have to stick to the rules of rational reasoning e.g.
probability theory
or a good substitute for it e.g. RSC in historical
linguistics."
Polat Kaya: There
is no rule saying that I must use "probability
theory or a good
substitute for it e.g. RSC in historical linguistics"
in analysing the
formation of words. The reason that I am getting so
many
correspondences between English, Greek and Latin words is due to
the fact that I am
examining each word with rational reasoning.
Otherwise I would
not get those correspondences. Thus you need to
change your
approach to the formation of words.
Mark Hubey said:
"The rules are
not artificial. They derive from sound rational
principles and have
been codified as the axioms of probability theory
circa 1930s by the
great Russian mathematician Kolmogorov. Surely as
an engineer you
should have more respect for mathematics than those
that have never
even had calculus in college."
Polat Kaya: I do
have a lot of respect for mathematics and I enjoyed
it tremendously. Do
not think for a moment that I do not know the
utility of
probability in mathematics. However, that does not mean
that I must use
probability for naming words or for naming my children
etc.. Let me again
accentuate that Turkish and GREEK are supposed to
be two distinct and
independently developed languages. You cannot
expect that both
independently developed the concept of a "GOD FOR
SEA" and then
each gave a name for that concept such that, by chance,
they both had
similar lettering and meanings. The likelihood of that
must be extremely
low unless someone manually interfered with the
intent of
usurpation.
Best wishes to all,
Polat Kaya
July 28, 2003