Turkish speaking ancient
Anatolian Farmers and the "Indo-European" languages.
Dear Friends,
Greetings to all.
In this paper entitled "Turkish Speaking Ancient Anatolian Farmers and the
"Indo-Europeans Languages", I will refer to and discuss one paper by
Prof. Russel Gray and PhD student Quentin Atkinson. In one of our past
communications with our friend Mr. Ari Akkermans, he was quick to put the
question to me saying: "Have you heard
about the Anatolian theory? Oh yeah there's an Anatolian Theory, but it isn't
Turkish what they mean is but Proto-Hittite." By
this he was saying that the name "Turkish" used in the paper was
misleading, and not truthful. However I want to present a different view of the
things regarding ancient Anatolian farmers in this paaper. Mr. Ari
Akkermans was referring to a theory put forward by Dr. Colin Renfrew and also
to a recent article written by Associate Professor Russell Gray and PhD student
Quentin Atkinson. The article was published in the British journal Nature and its
misleading title as reported in the news read:"Indo-European
languages traced to Turkish farmers".
It seemed the
mentioned theory was very much a case of using "science" for purposes
other than science. Evidently Mr. Ari Akkermans was quick to believe the
so-called the Anatolian Theory.
In our
communications, I had replied to him saying that I was aware of that
"theory" and I would write about it in a separate article. In this
posting I will do just that.
Actually I was
aware of this article since its publication in the Journal Nature. Its
news title was: "Indo-European languages traced to Turkish farmers".
The news about it said:
"Auckland University researchers have stunned academics around the world
by tracing the origins of the English language to Turkish farmers. Using a
novel approach to develop an Indo-European language tree, the researchers say
they have evidence the roots of the English language go back about 9,000 years
to Turkey. Associate Professor Russell Gray and PhD student Quentin
Atkinson published their research in the British journal Nature and their
findings on the long debated origins of the language have quickly spread
in news headlines around the world."
This headline and
the accompaniying "news" item requires a lot of washing with water
and soap to get rid of the camouflage cloaking on it. Particularly when it
tries to take English to a date as early as 9000 years ago to "Turkish
farmers in Turkey". As usual there is again play on words. English, like
all other so-called "Indo-European" and Semitic languages, is an
artificially manufactured language from Turkish. It is Turkish that was ancient
- not the recently manufactured language of English. The people who
manufacturered English used the ancient Turkish language as a data base and
restructured Turkish words and phrases into "English" words. In the
case of English, this language engineering is a recent event not earlier than
say 1,000 years but certainly not 9,000 years. The Babylonian Semites and early
Aryan Greeks and Latins were the frontrunners of such language engineering from
Turkish. English is a recent development very much along the development of
Judeo-Christian religious concepts whose origins are also deep in the ancient
Turanian Sky-God OGUZ religion. The founders of these recent religions first
destroyed and secondly usurped many of the tenets of the ancient Turanian OGUZ
religion to which they keep referring to as "Paganism",
"Heathenism", "Shamanism", etc. in order to obliterate the
name "OGUZ" and to deceptively portray this ancient Turanian Single
God concept as a "primitive" religion.
Below is a copy of
Russell Gray's writing as forwarded by Kamil Kartal. On the same subject,
another posting forwarded by Kamil Kartal should also be consulted. It was
forwarded by Kamil Kartal as:
Kamil KARTAL wrote:
>
Russell Gray
writes:
>
> 1.
Phylogenetic analyses of linguistic evolution. Questions about
> human origins
have an enduring fascination. Where did the Polynesians
> come from? How
did Indo-European languages spread over Europe?
> Genetic and
linguistic evidence provide vital clues to solving these
> mysteries of
our past. Recently there have been huge advances in the
> computational
methods used to make inferences from genetic data.
> Languages evolve
in remarkably similar ways to biological species.
> They split
into new languages, mutate, and sometimes go extinct.
> However,
despite these parallels linguists have not commonly used the
> phylogenetic
methods that have revolutionised evolutionary biology in
> the last
twenty years. This project involves analysing linguistic
> data using the
kind of methods evolutionary biologists have developed
> to investigate
molecular evolution. We are developing novel
> statistical
models of linguistic evolution and applying them to large
> Austronesian
and Indo-European language data sets. The analyses will
> be used to
test hypotheses about the settlement of the Pacific and
> the spread of
Indo-European languages. By placing genetic and
> linguistic
evidence in a common methodological framework we will be
> able to make
more powerful inferences about our past.
>
> NEW Gray, R.D.
& Atkinson, Q.D. (2003). Language-tree divergence
> times support
the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature,
> 426, 435-439.
(pdf)
The news title
alludes to the origin of the English language to "Turkish" farmers.
Yes the origin of
English is actually in the Turkish language of the Turkish farmers of Anatolia
but not the way that Russell D. Gray portrays. He implies that English, or for
that matter other so-called "Indo-European" languages, existed some
9,000 years ago in Anatolia and spread from Anatolia to Europe. However,
Indo-European languages did not exist than. What he reports is not only total
fallacy but is sophistry as well.
The paper by
Russell D. Gray and Q. D. Atkinson using computer generated results implies an
Anatolian origin of Indo-European languages. What is not clear is how the
computer processing pinpointed the name "Anatolia" as being the
origin of the so-called "Indo-European languages".
The alluded result
is not well explained. They want us to believe that since a computer came up
with a result indicating Anatolia as the place where "Indo-Europeans"
started farming some 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, it should be credible. What
they neglected to tell us was that their computer, most likely, was
"instructed" to come up with that answer. The title of their
paper would have been much more accurate if it had referred to the Turkish
language as the language spoken at the time of early farming by the native
Tur/Turk Anatolians before the arrival of "Indo-Europeans" into
Anatolia. Only then would the claim of the paper have some credibility and
relevance.
Aryan
Indo-Europeans were wanderers before they settled anywhere - as the name ARYAN
is from Turkish word "ARAYAN" meaning "wanderer" or
"searcher" (note the drop of one vowel "A" after the letter
"R"). The paper does not make any reference to the fact that the
Indo-European languages were intentionally manufactured from the Turkish
language of the native Anatolian Tur/Turk peoples at much later times.
In the paper
reference is made to:
> A rival
theory, proposed by Dr. Colin Renfrew of the University of
> Cambridge,
holds that the Indo-Europeans were the first farmers who
> lived in
ancient Turkey and that their language expanded not by
> conquest but
with the spread of agriculture some 10,000 to 8,000 years ago.
With due respect to
Dr. Colin Renfrew, I disagree with his theory that the Indo-Europeans were the
first farmers who lived in ancient Turkey and that their language expanded not
by conquest but with the spread of agriculture some 10,000 to 8,000 years ago.
This is just a conjecture or a misrepresentation and nothing can be further
from the truth. As usual, there is game-playing with words going on. There was
no Indo-European languages, let alone English, spoken in Anatolia earlier than
3000 years ago let alone the 10,000 to 8,000 years ago. When we consider the
fact that all Indo-European languages were artificially engineered languages
from Turkish at a much much later time, such a statement becomes incredible.
It is most likely
that Dr. Renfrew knows that the ancient Anatolians were Turanians and that
their language was Turkish. He probably also knows the fact that the Turanians
antedated the so-called Aryans (wanderers) both in Asia an Europe.
[1] The Greek wanderers supposedly were the first Indo-Europeans who
arrived in the area presently so-called "Greece" about the beginning
of the second millennium B.C. [2]. When they arrived, they already found
that there was a flourishing civilization of Tur/Turk peoples all over
Anatolia, the Aegean Islands, Thracia, Europe, north Africa, and the Middle
East. So they brought nothing with themselves except whatever the wanderers
could carry with them. So about the years 10,000 to 8000 years ago there were
no Indo-Europeans in Anatolia let alone the name "Europe". In
actuality, the European "continent" is an artificially created one.
The truth is that what is called "Europe" is really a continuation of
the continent of Asia. The name "Europe" starts with a Greek
mythological story and carries on to the present times. The natives of Anatolia
were Turanian Turkic speaking Tur/Turk peoples and hence they were also the
first Turkic farmers who initiated the farming in Anatolia. Thus his proposed
theory is unconvincing.
If these
researchers are trying to tell us that the native peoples of Anatolia from
eight to ten thousand years ago were so-called Indo-Europeans, they have to
provide better evidence than what they get out of a "loaded" computer
program. It should be remembered that what comes out of a computer is directly
related to the input. Most likely, the name of "Anatolia" was part of
the input parameters into the system and hence that is what conveniently came
out. And the hidden message in their computer programs result is that
"Ancient Anatolia was an Indo-European land". Of course nothing could
be further from the truth.
It is not clear how
can a computer program distinguish among so many different geographical areas
of the world that it was the Anatolian land that this so-called
"Indo-European farmers" came from. How would the computer know that
unless it was loaded so as input parameters?
If the earliest
Anatolian farmers were Greeks or any other Indo-European, the name of the
grains that the earliest farmers cultivated in Anatolia and the Middle East
would be in an Indo-European language. But it is not so.
For instance,
"BARLEY" ("ARPA" in Turkish) was one of the grains that was
cultivated by the ancient Anatolian Turkish farmers. I say "Turkish
farmers" because "Anatolia" has always been "Turanian and
Turkish speaking" long before the wandering Greeks ever arrived there.
Greeks seem to be one of the earliest Aryans arrivals in the area. Two names
are given in Greek related to the name of "barley". KRITHI for "barley" and "KRASOPATERAS" for
"barley-corn" [3]. "Barley-corn is defined as "a
grain of barley". [4] It is unusual to relate "barley
and corn to each other, but nonetheless they have done it, most likely for
camouflaging purposes. Now let us examine the second so-called "Greek"
word KRASOPATERAS for its origin.
The name "KRASOPATERAS" is an anagrammatized word as is the case
with most of the other Greek words if not all. When the word
"KRASOPATERAS" is deciphered (rearranged) letter-by-letter as "OKESSA-ARPATR", and read phonetically as in
Turkish, it is found to be a restructured and disguised form of the Turkish
expression "OKUSSA ARPATIR" (OGUZCA ARPADIR) meaning "In Oguz language it is
ARPA".
The word
"OKUSCA" ("OGUZÇA") means "in OGUZ language which is
another name for "TÜRKÇE" meaning "Turkish". The
linguists will know it as such.
Now this is most
revealing. This Greek name tells us that: a) there was a language in
ancient times and its name was "OGUZÇA" which is another name for
Turkish; b) the name of "barley in that language was "ARPA" which
is exactly what it is in Turkish.
The obvious
question for the "linguists" is, how is this possible if Turkish did
not exist at the time of "ancient Greeks"? Is it my deciphering
of this Greek word that is in "error" or did some clever linguist with
loose hands incorporate this Turkish expression into a "Greek"
looking and sounding word for themselves? Evidently, the word changer did not
realize that while he was altering Turkish expressions into "Greek"
he was also leaving his fingerprints behind. In his alteration process he also
preserved the Turkish text that he was taking and disguising. In other
words they forgot to wipe away their fingerprints. Evidently the linguists have
a lot to explain about this disturbing picture!!!
Additionally if we
were to rearrange the word KRASOPATERAS letter-by-letter as "TOREKSSA-ARPA" (TORIKSE-ARPA), we
find the Turkish expression "TURIKSE
ARPA" (TÜRKÇE ARPA) meaning "in Turkish it is
ARPA". This again verifies that Turkish word ARPA was the earliest. In
other words, whichever way one deciphers this Greek word, the name OGUZ or
TURKSA/TURKÇE/TORIKCE, together with the Turkish name "ARPA" for
"barley", come out.
The analysis of
this "Greek" word "KRASOPATERAS" is most revealing. It
shows that:
a) The Greeks
did not have a name of their own for "barley" at the time when they
came to ancient Greece. Instead they constructed a name from an OGUZCA
(Turkish) expression that described barley as "ARPA" in Turkish.
Such linguistic
deception by ancient Greeks and others has been embellished in many ways in the
manufacturing of new Indo-European languages right to present times which has
deceived the people of the world.
b) Additionally
this Greek word also admits that there was another previous language whose name
was "OKUSSA" (OKUSCA, OGUZCA) in which the name for
"barley" was "ARPA". Of course, this other previous
language "OKUSSA" was nothing but the language of "OGUZCA"
which is another name for "TURKISH" language. This verifies the
fact that OGUZCA (TÜRKCE) was an earlier language and
was the reference language. It is no wonder then that Genesis 11:1 states
there was one language the whole world spoke. That unnamed language must
have been the reference OGUZ language by another name Turkish.
c) In this anagram,
embedded into the so-called "Greek" word of KRASOPATERAS are
also two Turkish suffixes. The Turkish phrase "OKUSSA ARPATER"
(>"OKUS-SA ARPA-TER") is made of two Turkish nouns with two
Turkish suffixes. The nouns are: OGUZ (OKUS, OKUZ) and ARPA, and the
suffixes are "SA/ÇA" and "TER/TIR/TUR". This indicates that
the agglutinative nature of the Turkish language was already established a long
time ago, and Turkish was a very advanced language of Anatolia at the time when
Greeks were manufacturing a language for themselves from Turkish. Turkish was
already a fully developed language both grammatically and vocabularily wise
contrary to all misinformation under the curtain of "being
scientific".
d) This is
proof that the language of native Anatolian farmers was Turkish (Oguzca) rather
than so-called "Indo-European", and that the Turanian Tur/Turk
peoples of Anatolia used the word "ARPA" to describe this earliest
developed and domesticated grain. This ancient Turkish word has come down
to present times. It also indicates that farming was a Turanian Tur/Turk
peoples' invention rather than the "Indo-Europeans". If
"Indo-Europeans were in Anatolia some 8,000 10,000 years ago, Tur/Turk
peoples must have been far earlier than the Indo-Europeans.
e) This
ancient Turkish name "ARPA" in the Greek word for "barley"
also indicates that the "Indo-European theory of Anatolia" by Dr.
Colin Renfrew is incorrect. Dr. Colin Renfrews assuming that
"indo-European" languages existed some 8,000 years ago in Anatolia is
a fallacy. Evidently he is a victim of the misinformation campaign trying to
artificially create an "ancient Indo-European languages" concept.
f) The plough
was the instrument that was used in cultivating the fields for planting
"barley" (arpa). The Sumerian word for this instrument is given
as "gis.APIN" [5] [6]. It is most
enlightening to compare this word with the Turkish word SABAN (SAPAN) for
plough. Linguists should readily see that the Sumerian and the Turkish words
for "plough" are one and the same. I am of the opinion that when the
Sumerian texts were read, the Sumerian word for "plough" was
"SAPIN" (SAPAN), but it was presented to the world as
"gis.APIN" meaning "wooden plough" in order to distance the
Sumerian word from Turkish "SAPAN" (SABAN).
Turkish
"SABAN" (SAPAN) and Sumerian "gis.APIN", being two words
for "plough", makes Turkish and Sumerian equally aged languages in
time while leaving out of the picture the so-called "Indo-Europeans"
languages until much later times.
In view of these
revelations deciphered from the Greek word "KRASOPATERAS", it would
be much more accurate to say that "the native ancient language of
Anatolian farmers was Turkish and much later Indo-European languages were
artificially fabricated from Turkish of Anatolia." Particularly,
after the invasion of Anatolia by Alexander the Great, the ancient Turkish
language of Anatolia was changed and converted into "Greek".
It is curious to
note that the Greek name THORICOS (TÜRÜK, TORIK, TURK) appears as one of the
names of people settled along the coastal lands of Attica as shown on a map in
the book called "A Concise History of Ancient Greece" by Peter
Green. [7] The name "THORICOS" is the ancient
hellenized way of saying "TÜRÜK" (TORIK) meaning "TURK".
In addition to the
name of "barley" (arpa), there are some other names that are also
very revealing. For example, the term for "grass" in Greek is also a
suspect as being from Turkish source. The Greek term for
"grass" is given as XORTAPI [8]
When this term
XORTAPI, where Greek "X" represents "KH", is rearranged
letter-by-letter as "IAPRHK-OT", it is the Turkish expression
"YAPRAK OT" meaning "leaf grass" or "leaf
plant". Indeed "grass" is a plant which is made up of
straight and thin leaves. The Turkish term OT means "grass".
Turkish "YAPRAK" is the name for "leaf" which comes in many
shapes. So the Greek linguists combined Turkish words "OT" and
"YAPRAK" and restructured them into the Greek word XORTAPI meaning
"grass".
Even the English
word "BARLEY", when deciphered letter-by-letter as
"ARBELY", where Y=U, and read phonetically as in Turkish, is an
anagram of Turkish expression "ARBALU" (ARPALI) meaning "with
barley". "Barley" (ARPA), probably being the first
domesticated grain and being the most consumed and important human nourishment
source, must have been and still is one of the most wanted grains in the
world. Therefore it has probably been in the human diet since the very
early history of man. These linguistic evidences show that domestication of
ARPA, and its plantation by way of "ploughing was a "TURANIAN"
invention and its development was by Turkish speaking Tur/Turk peoples of the
ancient world.
Interesting
discussions have been presented regaarding Anatolia in my posting:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Polat_Kaya/message/287
One of the earliest
utilized wild plants in Anatolia must have been the wild "RYE".
The Greek word for "RYE" is given as "SIKALIS".
[9] The Turkish name for this is given as:
a)
"ÇAVDAR", botanical name "SECALE CEREALE",
b) "DELICE
OTU" meaning "grass that makes one crazy", and
c) "ÇAYIR
OTU", botanical name "LOLIUM TEMULENTUM" [10]
Now let us examine
some of these names.
The word
"CEREALE" when rearranged letter-by-letter as "CAERLEE" is
a restructured form of the Turkish expression "ÇAYIRLI" meaning
"from meadow". Indeed, all cereals are "from the meadow"
(ÇAYIR ) including "RYE".
The supposedly
Latin word "TEMULENTUS" or "TEMULENTUM" is given to mean
"drunken, tipsy" [11] The Latin word TEMULENTUM, when
rearranged letter-by-letter as "TELU-ETNUM-M", is the distorted form
of Turkish expression "TELÜ ETENUM" (DELÜ EDENÜM) meaning "I
make crazy" or "I cause delirium", "I cause
drunkenness".
It is no wonder
that the "Latin" meaning of this word is "drunken or
tipsy". This is very interesting, because one name of
"RYE" in Turkish is given as "DELICE" (item b) as I noted
above, meaning "wild, crazy like, madly". So this botanical name of
RYE in Latin has also been manufactured from Turkish "DELU" (TELU)
meaning "crazy" and "EDENUM" meaning "I
make". The name must have been coined due to some chemical quality
of this plant that when eaten gives the effect of drunkenness or tipsyness.
Ancient Tur/Turks noted this and accordingly named the plant
"DELICE".
The Latin name
"LOLIUM" means "darnel" in English and it in turn means
"DELICE OTU" or "KARAÇAYIR" in Turkish. Here again we find
relatedness of "LOLIUM" and "DARNEL" to the Turkish
word "DELICE" given as a name to this plant by Turkish farmers.
In the latin name
LOLIUM, if the first letter L was replaced by "D", the resulting word
"DOLIUM" and Turkish word "DELIYUM" meaning "I am
crazy" would very much have the same form and the same meaning. Turkish
"DELICE", that is< "darnel" or "lolium" come
from the Turkish word "DELI" meaning "crazy".
The name
"DARNEL", when rearranged letter-by-letter as "DELRAN" is
from Turkish word "DELIREN" (DELIRTEN) meaning "crazy
maker". Again the meaning is along the meaning of the Turkish word
"DELICE" given above.
The word
"SIKALIS" or "SECALE" and the Turkish DELICE are very much
related to each other. Particularly when the letter "D" is
downshifted to letter "C", and "C" is often vocalized as
"S", the relation becomes even more obvious. This shifting of
letters up and down by one letter is called Ceaserss encryption (one up or
down shifting in encryption) and is commonly used in European encryption
processes of Turkish words.
Similarly, the
other botanical name "SECALE" is very much the same as the Greek name
"SIKALIS". If we were to change the first letter "S"
in "SECALE" with the letter "D", we get the word
"DECALE". This word when rearranged as "DELECA" is
again a distorted form of Turkish word "DELICE", that is, one Turkish
name for "RYE".
Thus the
"scientific term" "SECALE CEREALE" is in fact made up from
the Turkish expression "ÇAYIRLI DELICE" or "DELICE ÇAYIR
OTU".
There is also the
Greek word SIKALIKOS for RYE. This name seems to have been formulated
from another Turkish word that describes a feature of grain plants such as
barley, wheat and Rye. These plants have thin arrow-like extensions that
come out from ARPA and similar grains on stalk. This thin extension is called
"KILÇIK" in Turkish meaning "fishbone, fishspine" as in
fish and botanically "awn" of wheat and barley,
[12] English "awns of barle" means "arpa dikenleri",
"arpa kilçiklari", "arpa sakali" in Turkish. The rye
plant also has awns.
Thus the Greek word
SIKALIKOS, when rearranged as "KILSIKSA-O" is the distorted form of
the Turkish phrase "KILÇIKCA O" meaning "it is like
fishbone", it is awn".
So all these
correspondences cannot be found unless some clever European linguists
manipulated these Turkish expressions into corresponding "words" of
the so-called European languages.
All of these
indicate that the names of these plants in Anatolia were originally in Turkish
rather than Greek or any other "Indo-European" language. There
was no Greek or Indo-European languages while all were speaking a Turanian
Turkish language. Thus the conclusions based on the computer analyses carried
out by Associate Professor Russell Gray and PhD student Quentin Atkinson are
incorrect. The same applies for the so-called theory of Dr. Colin Renfrew
stating that "Indo-Europeans were the first farmers who lived in ancient
Turkey and that their language expanded not by conquest but with the spread of
agriculture some 10,000 to 8,000 years ago.".
Additionally, this
statement of Dr. Colin Renfrew implies that the language of the so-called
Anatolian Indo-Europeans spread into Europe by "peaceful" means
(i.e., "expanded not by conquest but with the spread of
agriculture"). This is not true either because stealing words and
phrases from the native Turanian language and then restructuring them into
words for the so-called "Indo-European" languages is not a peaceful
activity. In fact, it was very intentional but hidden hostility towards
the native Turanians of Anatolia. On top of all this, agriculture was the
invention of the Turanians contrary to all the verbosity under the guise of
science.
Furthermore and as
a final note we should also investigate the words used for ploughing and the
related concepts in Greek since "ploughing" is the essence of
farming". The Greek words AROTRIASIS or AROTRIASEWS or AROTRIWSIS are
given as words for "ploughing, tilling", AROTRIASTES for
"ploughman" and AROTRON for "plough, plow". [13]
First I must note
that the Greek symbol for letter "S" ending these Greek words is a
very deceptive one: it is not like the normal letter S. It has a shape that can
replace the sounds S, Sh, Ch and Z in Turkish source texts. This is also
the case in the following Greek words.
The Greek word
AROTRIASIS meaning "ploughing", when rearranged letter-by-letter as
"SOR-ISITAR-A", is the restructured form of the Turkish expression
"SÜR IShITIR O" (sürme ishitir o) meaning "it is the work of
ploughing". Türkish word "SÜR" from verb
"sürmek" is the term used for "ploughing the fields" as in
the Türkish expression "tarlalarin sürülmesi" meaning "the
ploughing of the fields". Thus we have an exact correspondence
although the Greek word has been deliberately distorted and alienated.
AROTRIASEWS meaning
"ploughing", when rearranged letter-by-letter as
"SORWE-ISATAR", is the restructured form of the Turkish expression
"SÜRME IShITIR" meaning "it is work of ploughing". The
Greek bogus letter W in this case replaces the Turkish letter M as the inverse
of W is the letter M and vice versa. Again we have an exact
correspondence.
Similarly the Greek
word AROTRIWSIS meaning "ploughing", when rearranged letter-by-letter
as "SORWA-ISITR" is again a restructured form of the Turkish
expression "SÜRME IShITIR" meaning "it is work of
ploughing".
The Greek word
AROTRIASTES meaning "ploughman", when rearranged letter-by-letter as
"SITSE-ARTAR-O", is the restructured and Hellenized form of the
Turkish expression "ÇÜTCÜ ERTIR O" (ÇIFTCI ERDIR O) meaning "he
is the ploughman", "he is the farmer". Again we have an
exact correspondence.
Finally the Greek
word AROTRON meaning "plough, plow", uses a different concept in
Turkish related to plough in coming up with the Greek word for
"plough". The "plough" as it is pulled by a pair of
oxen and as guided by the ploughman, upturns the soil or turns the soil
sideways. Thus a plough works as a device that turns the soil over. Now with
this concept in mind, when the Greek word AROTRON meaning "plough" is
rearranged letter-by-letter as "TONAROR", it is found to be a
restructured form of the Turkish expression "TÖNdERER" (DÖNdÜRER,
DÖNdÜRÜR) meaning "it turns it over". The word is from the Turkish
verb "döndürmek". It is most likely that one of the letters D
or T in the Turkish source text has been dropped for the purpose of
disguising. As noted again we have a correspondence.
It must be noted
that the Greek linguist has avoided using the Turkish word "SABAN"
(SAPAN) for "plough" and has utilized a different concept related to
"plough" in Turkish to achieve the desired camouflage and alienation.
We have a somewhat
different situation in the case of Latin and Italian languages. It is a
known fact that the newly "ploughed" fields appear as if they have
been "combed" with an iron-toothed comb that penetrates and upturns
the soil. The side-by-side furrows that are left over by the plough, that is,
the up-turned lines that are called "karik", "herik", or
descriptively "sabanin actigi iz" in Turkish, that is, "furrow",
appear as if they were the traces of a comb. In this context, a
"plough" is a kind of "comb" that conceptually combs the
surface of the field.
With this context
in mind, let us now examine the Latin words "ARATRUM" (plough),
"ARATOR" (ploughman), "ARATIO" (ploughing, agriculture).
[14]
The Latin word
ARATRUM meaning "plough", when rearranged letter-by-letter as
"TARARUM", is the rearranged form of Turkish "TARARUM"
meaning "I comb", "I scan", that is, "I am a device
like a comb". This is what a "plough" does in ploughing the
fields.
Similarly the Latin
word ARATOR meaning "ploughman" is from Turkish expression
"TARAR O" meaning "he combs" which is what a
"ploughman" does. He "combs" (scans) the entire face
of the field one furrow at a time thus leaving behind a "combed" look
to the field.
The Latin ARATIO
for "ploughing" is from Turkish expression "TARAYI O"
(tarayor o) again meaning "it combs".
All these
supposedly Indo-European farming terms are actually manufactured linguistically
from the Turkish verb "taramak" meaning "to comb", "to
scan" and hence their origins are in Turkish rather then
"Indo-European" languages. This means that farming was originally a
Turanian culture and the farming terminology was originally in Turkish. Turkish
was not only the "model" (proto) language but it was the antedated
language of them all not only in mainland Asia but also in Asia-Minor
(Anatolia), Middle East, Europe and North Africa. These facts must be known to
some European and Semitic linguists.
In view of all
this, it can be said that the method used by Associate Professor Russell Gray
and PhD student Quentin Atkinson to use a computer program to investigate
things that evolve naturally and randomly may be a valid approach, but, using
the same technique to investigate languages that are culture based and man made
(i.e., artificially manufactured from another language) is not a valid
approach. The investigated subject is already heavily loaded and distorted.
Deriving from this computer study, the conclusion and the claim that Indo-Europeans
were the first agriculturalists in Anatolia is misleading and fallacious. They
overlook the fact that Indo-Europeans were wanderer groups who had no land of
their own until they settled in smaller groups here and there on native
Turanian land and started learning everything including agriculture from the
much earlier settled Turanians.
After having said
that, I want to restate once again that there were no "Indo-European"
and "Semitic" languages before - in Anatolia or anywhere else. There
was one language that was spoken very widely in the world, as also reported in
GENESIS 11:1, and that unnamed language was Turanian Turkish. The credibility
attributed to "Indo-European languages" as "authentic ancient
languages" is now lost because they are discovered to be artificially
manufactured languages and their words have been madeup from Turkish words and
phrases by way of restructuring and disguising (anagrammatizing).
Thus the news flash
saying that "Auckland University researchers have stunned academics around
the world by tracing the origins of the English language to Turkish
farmers" is inaccurate and untruthful. The present world has been
conned and shaped by this kind of misinforming propaganda. The English
language is probably not much older than a thousand years. It wouldnt be
surprising if this whole episode was an attempt to artificially extend the
roots of English back in time by 9,000 years to ancient Anatolia where the
native farmers were Turkish speaking Turanians.
REFERENCES:
[1]
Encyclopaedia Britannica World Language Dictionary (EBWLD), 1963,
Vol. 2, p. 1353.
[2]
Peter Green, "A Concise History Of Ancient Greece To The Close of
Classical Era", Thames and Hudson, 1981, p. 14.
[3]
DIVRY's "Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary, p.
35.
[4]
Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth Edition, 1947, p. 85.
[5]
Dr. Mebrure Tosun ve Dr. Kadriye Yalvaç, "Sumer, Babil, Asur
Kanunlari ve Ammi-Saduqa Fermani", Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, Ankara,
1989, p. 305.
[6]
Edgar H. Sturtevant, "A Hittite Glossary", Yale University by
The Linguistic Society of America, "WILLIAM DWIGHT WHITNEY
LINGUISTIC SERIES", 1936, p. 24.
[7]
Peter Green, "A Concise History Of Ancient Greece To The Close of
Classical Era", Thames and Hudson, 1981, p. 95.
[8]
DIVRY's "Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary, p.
742.
[9]
DIVRY's "Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary, p.
674.
[10]
Ingilizce-Türkçe Redhouse Sözlügü, Istanbul, 1980, p. 849.
[11]
Cassell's Latin - English Dictionary, Compiled by D. P. Simpson,
MACMILLAN, , USA, 1987, p. 222.
[12]
Ingilizce-Türkçe Redhouse Sözlügü, Istanbul, 1980, p. 650.
[13]
DIVRY's "Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary, p.
438.
[14]
Cassell's Latin - English Dictionary, Compiled by D. P. Simpson,
MACMILLAN, , USA, 1987, p. 19.
Best wishes to all,
Polat Kaya
24/01/2006
Note: I had
completed the draft form of this paper by 08/12/2004. Because of some of my
other studies, it had to wait until now to make it final.
***