Re: [[bcn-3]] Digest Number 8 (Oktay Ahmed)

--- In, Polat Kaya <tntr@C...> wrote:

Dear Oktay Ahmed,

Merhaba. I am glad that you wrote what you did in the first part of
your letter because you helped bring to the surface another Turkish
suffix that has been taken over by the Indo-European languages. You
helped to verify, albeit unwittingly, that I was right in what I was
saying all along even though you thought I was confusing people. I
have said many times that my intention is not to confuse anyone but
rather to bring clarity to a confused linguistic situation. However,
making people realize that an intentional confusing of languages has
taken place is not easy.

After reading your letter, it became clear that "ev" could be an
anagram of Turkish genitive suffix -in, -In, -ün, -un. When we
substitute the Greek v-like symbol (representing letter n) for "n" in
these forms of this Turkish suffix, they become -iv, -Iv, -üv, -uv,
respectively for which "ev" meaning "of" becomes a good substitute.

When we substitute the Turkish genitive suffix "in" in place of "ev"
in "GORDIYEV", then we can get: a) "GOR-DIYIN" for "KÖR DÜYÜN"
meaning "blind knot", or b) "GORDI-IN" (KÖRDInIN) meaning
"of Gordi" which is exactly what you say "GORDI + (y)EV" means.

I have no question in my mind that Russian GORDIYEV for
"blind knot" is an anagram of Turkish GORDIYIN (KÖR DÜYÜN and
KÖR DÜYÜM) for "blind knot". The Greeks got their GORDIAN from
the TUR Phrygians where the N in GORDIAN is represented by a
Greek v-like symbol. Greek GORDIAN and Turkish GORDIYIN (KÖR DÜYÜN)
must have been taken into Russian as GORDIEV where the Greek v-like
letter for "n" was kept as a V letter.

Let me explain further. If we substitute this "v" like Greek symbol
for the "n" in the Turkish word "GOR-DIYIN" (KÖR DÜYÜN) then we can
get "GORDIYIV" (GORDIYEV) in Russian for "blind knot". If we do the
same in Turkish "GORDI'NIN" meaning "of GORDI", we can
get "GORDIVIV". However, in the Greek alphabet, the Y and the V and
the U are all interchangeable, thus with v = y for the first V, we can
end up with "GORDIYIV" in Russian meaning "of Gordi" where "Gordi
(Kördi)" is now a noun. Thus, depending on the way one reads the word
GORDIYEV, one can get both meanings of the Russian word GORDIYEV i.e.,

As I said it in my earlier paper, the Greek alphabet is a most
ingenuously designed alphabet with many facets to it. In this
alphabet, what is seen on the surface when reading Greek texts is
not necessarily what is behind. The double-identity features of
some of the Greek letters in the Greek alphabet facilitate the
camouflage of the Turkish source extremely well in anagrams.
It appears that the Greek alphabet is specifically designed first to
anagram Turkish into Greek, and second to read Greek text, thus
enabling Greek to form a base for a series of other languages that
share certain features.

Let me give you an example. When we look up the English word
"of" in the English to Greek dictionary, among a few entries we see
the Greek word "ab" where the "a" is pronounced somewhere
between an "a" and an "o" while the "b" (beta) is pronounced as a "v"
thus forming the base for English "of" and also Russian suffix "ev"
meaning "of". However the "v" sound in the Greek "ab" can be
replaced by the Greek v-like symbol for "n" thus forming the Turkish
genitive suffix "-in". So while in one hand, the English and Slavic
languages point to Greek as the source for "of" and "yev" etc., the
Greek word itself (i.e., "ab") is an anagram of Turkish genitive
suffix forms "-in", "-In", "-ün", "-un". You can see that the
explanation of this situation in words is very difficult to convey.
It is almost a Gordian knot in itself. But rest assured that I am
not trying to confuse anyone.

The implication of this analysis is that the suffix "(y)ev" that you
pointed out of being used in Russian as well as in Macedonian,
Serbian, Croatian and some other Slavic languages is an anagram of
Turkish genitive suffix "(n)in, (n)In, (n)un, (n)ün". Here I used
your explanation as the input to my analysis. As can be seen, there
is no confusing on my part. You somehow could not make the connection
between these words and therefore accused me, unjustifiably, of
causing confusion - which was not the case at all.

Now as for the rest of your writing I think what you said is
unfortunate. You should not have written it but you did. I will not
dwell on it. Since you have such strong negative views about me and
my writings, please feel free to not read them. That way, you will
not waste your time and you will not be upset either. I will state
for the record though, that I am not a demagogue nor do I make

If I were you though, I would have written just the first part of your
letter and after that, as a closing sentence, I would have asked:
Polat Kaya, how do you explain this anomaly or difference? If you
had closed your letter like that and left the rest to me, your
communication would have been scholarly and well-received.

Best wishes to you and to all,

Polat Kaya,

August 27, 2003


Oktay Ahmed wrote:
> Dear Mr Polat Kaya,
> Some time ago I said that I'll not answer anymore to your postings,
> but I'll do it again just once:
> At 11:25 AM 26-08-03 +0000, you wrote:
> > Another interesting entry in the same source given above is the
> > Turkish "kördügüm" which exists in Russian as "GORDIYEV". Here
> > the
> > final "v" which must come from the Greek symbol "v" for "n" which
> > makes it "GORDIYEN" from Turkish "KÖR DÜYÜN". Thus it is seen that
> > even this Russian word is an anagram of Turkish. Evidently, the
> > letter "v" has been used for anagrammatizing purposes and to
> > camouflage its Turkishness. In the Greek alphabet, lower case "n"
> > is
> > written with a "v" like symbol thus providing a very skilfull
> > camouflage instrument.
> You are confusing readers here with your lack of knowledge, Mr Kaya.
> The word "GORDIYEV" (gordijev) is consisted from two entities:
> gordi + (y)ev
> The suffix -ev means "of", i.e. gordiyev = "of Gordi". That is
> equivalent to Turkish genitive.
> Beside of Russian, it's the same in Macedonian, Serbian, Croatian
> and some other Slavic languages.
> I wonder whether your "locigal analyse" of things that
> "linguisticaly educated linguists cannot see" will continue with
> personal attack to me (again), to others or you'll apologize for
> making demagogy and wasting our time here. Or, probably, you'll
> repeat your "you don't understand what I am talking about", "go back
> and read my previous writings", "you are blind" or so sentences...
> Think ecologicaly. Don't pollute the internet with demagogy,
> confusing logics, anagrammization, conspiracy theories, fear that
> Turkish will die some day, etc.
> Really with best wishes,
> Oktay