Re: [hrl_2] I would like to see examples of internal derivations of Turkish words

Dear Petr Hrubis,

Thank you for writing. I do not know how long you have been following my writings, but there seems to be some misunderstanding of what I am saying and showing.

If you think that I am "transforming" Turkish words and phrases to try and catch a fit in some Indo-European word, that would be wrong thinking.  What I am doing is deciphering words of European "languages" back into Turkish because those words have been manufactured from Turkish by way of restructuring Turkish words and phrases.  For example, please read carefully my recent writings about the words"ARITHMETICA" and "MATHEMATICUS". 

When a Turkish expression is encrypted, that is, restructured, into another word such as the words of the Indo-European (IE) languages, then, the "Turkish" text  has been transformed into some other "format" which is not recognizable as Turkish anymore - because the original Turkish text is broken into pieces and then restructured into another form thereby breaking the visual connection.  

Breaking up and restructuring a Turkish word or expression is similar to when an English message is encrypted for security purposes. The text is first broken into smaller pieces and then these parts are rearranged in such a way that the original text is not evident in the resulting new text.  This is sometimes called scrambling because the transmitted message does not easily disclose the original message. At the receiving end, a receiver who knows the encryption code can decode and put the received message back into its original form. Thus the receiver is able to read the original message again. This kind of message encryption is done in modern day communication all the time. Through years of research and detective work, I have discovered that the "Indo-European and "Semitic" languages are full of words that have been manufactured from Turkish words and phrases.  However, these words of the Indo-European and Semitic languages are still in their restructured form.  Now I am decoding those encrypted words of the so-called "Indo-European and "Semitic" languages back into their original Turkish source text. In other words I am re-restructuring  them (i.e., decompiling or reengineering) back to their original Turkish texts that they were made from.  

If you are asking for an algorithm of the way that the Greek, Latin or English etc. linguists anagrammatized Turkish words and phrases into these made up languages, the answer is that there is no single algorithm that they used in reformatting Turkish words and phrases.  There are a number of techniques, however, that they keep using in different combinations.  Basically, the original Turkish word or phrase is subdivided into its Turkish syllabic sub-components.  These sub-components, most of the time, are shuffled - like shuffling a deck of cards.  There is no algorithm in a random process of shuffling.  The shuffling places the sub-components differently from their original locations.  They can be rearranged forwards or backwards with some of the vowels being dropped or changed, some of the consonants being hardened or softened or even replaced by another related consonant.  For instance, an original T can be softened to a D, or an original D can be hardened to a T. An original C can be hardened to a K or vice-versa. An original K can be expressed as a C or as a G or as an H or even as a Q.  An original B can be hardened to a P  or even changed into a V.  An original P can be expressed as a B or as an F.  An original C can be replaced by an S or written as a C but vocalized as an S.  A Turkish Z or Sh can be converted into S or SS.  For example, the so-called English word "ESSAY", meaning "a literary composition, is manufactured from Turkish "YAZI" by first rearranging "YAZI" backwards as "IZAY" and second replacing the Turkish Z with an SS - making "ISSAY".  The final polishing is done by changing the Turkish I into an E.  Thus the Turkish word "YAZI", meaning "a writing" or "a paper" or "an article", magically becomes "ESSAY" meaning the same as Turkish "YAZI" but which is not recognizable as being from Turkish.  

Sometimes, a longer form of a Turkish word is chosen as the starting point.  This gives the anagrammatizer more letters to work with (i.e., more substance) and als to camouflage. After anagrammatizing, part of the resultant word may be cut to present a bogus root word. Sometimes, they choose an alternate Turkish expression describing the concept they are after, instead of the well-known Turkish word for the concept.  Sometimes letters of the original text are arranged in such a way that the manufactured words give the impression of having some regular prefix or suffix. Generally the new word is the rearranged form of the concept described by a Turkish expression.  All of this is done for camouflage purposes.  After all, the anagrammatizer wants to manufacture new words from Turkish but he does not want anyone to know  about it.  So he disfigures the Turkish source text into a camouflaged format.  The Greek alphabet is the most notorius in this regard. Many Greek alphabet symbols have two or more identities meaning that they can be used to replace one another without being detected.  For example, U, V, Y and W are all interchangeable symbols of the the Greek alphabet. This means that a Turkish U or V  or Y can easily be replaced by any other one of them. The letters S + K or K + S in the source Turkish text can be replaced with the bogus letter X.  Additionally, the Turkish KH sound is replaced with X-like symbol that looks like an X.  So there are an endless number of tricks available to the word anagrammatizer and he has utmost freedom to use anyone or any combination of them.  Thus they have been playing on safe ground all along.  

On top of this, there is the Caesar Encryption (see technique that they invented where a consonant can be alphabetically shifted upwards or downwards in the alphabet.  For example, a source M can be replaced with an L or with an N.  Sometimes they can even be shifted two or more alphabetic positions. Other times they use a trick called linguistic wrapping where they add letters or words to further hide the Turkish source text. There are other tricks but this is the essence of it.  And lastly, the source text in Turkish, before restructuring, is different in every case which adds diversity.  Words are names for different concepts. Using different forms of Turkish expressions derived from a root word provides variety between the manufactured words for different members of the so-called "Indo-European" family of languages. Although the whole process may appear as an achievement, the fact is that it is stealing!  

The deciphering of the words, that have been made up from Turkish, back into Turkish is even more difficult a task.  It is particularly difficult for the reader if he/she does not know Turkish and therefore cannot readily relate words to each other. In other words, knowing Turkish is a must!.  Even if one knows Turkish but does not suspect that the IE languages have been made up from Turkish by restructuring Turkish words and phrases, then, there is no way that one can find the Turkish source of,  say, the Greek or Latin or English words.  In other words, the door leading one to see the light has already been closed to this kind of reader.  He/she is already conditioned to think that each language is one which has been developed genuinely and independently from other languages. The people-conning "linguists" who generated "new IE languages" have already brainwashed the sincere and honest linguists of the world as well as the public. Having been preconditioned, they would not even consider the possibility of Indo-European or Semitic languages being made up from Turkish. All kinds of politically generated historical and linguistic propaganda have been woven around these languages since the time of Sumerians and Masarians by some special interest groups of wanderers, so much so that it makes my task of communicating this new discovery to readers even more difficult. 

Those wanderer groups who stole the worldwide language of Turkish were definitely very clever people and they did a remarkable job of transformng Turkish into IE languages. But when I discovered, by accident, that  some words of these so-called ancient Indo-European languages were very much Turkish in origin, then the whole picture changed. 

After years of studying countless words of these languages and deciphering many of them, I got to be very efficient in recognizing them. Since you have not done what I have been doing, and most likely you do not know Turkish, not only are you at a disadvantage, but, you may even think that what I am doing is a "chance" occurrance - which is not the case at all. 

You said:

"I'm afraid your 'system' lacks the necessary regularity and you seem to be loosing the struggle against accidental similarity and the simple logic of mathematical probability."

I am afraid what you think is a fallacy!  I am not losing any struggle.  On the contrary, I am gaining speed!  This I have explained many times.  First of all, as I explained above, your, or any reader's, expectation of "regularity" in this process is not warranted. We are dealing with man-made words that fill thousands of pages in dictionaries. You cannot expect each and everyone of those words in the dictionaries to have been made up in the same way. I am providing a variety of words so that I can cover a large spectrum of concepts and show that in every case I am correct.  This I have shown over and over again. Because of that, my discovery that the Indo-European and Semitic languages were made up from Turkish is proven as correct.  It must be pointed out that there cannot be a "regularity" in deciphering words of IE and Semitic languages that have been randomly encrypted from Turkish words and phrases as I highlited above. We are not making experiments to understand the features of "gravity", a force of nature.  Only in such an experiment can one expect and get regularity.  But in the case of languages, it is not so! Languages are "man made" and the man-made words are formed from words of another model language which has been buried into the newly structured word formats. The new "alien" word formations were done with the intentional will of the usurper and with all the tricks known to him.  Every bank robbery is different from each other - executed differently under varying conditions.  Hence one does not get a "regularity".  

As for the "simple logic of mathematical probability" that you refer to, perhaps you are not aware of the fact that I wrote about the probability of not having the correspondenses between the words of IE languages and Turkish words and phrases.  Since I am showing those correspondences, then, they are definite indications that Indo-European and Semitic languages are made up from Turkish. Please see some of my previous articles at:

You used the term "METATHESIS" in your argument with the belief that it is a Greek word. Yet the truth about it is totally different. I want to explain the identity of this Greek word for all to see.  Let us first understand its known identity.

From Wikipedia,, we have the following definition for "metathesis":


"Metathesis in linguistics is a sound change that alters the order of phonemes in a word. The most common instance of metathesis is the reversal of the order of two adjacent phonemes. Many languages have words that show this phenomenon, and some use it as a regular part of their grammar (e.g. Fur). The process of metathesis has altered the shape of many familiar words in the English language, too. Metathesis is one of the most common types of speech errors." 

The writer of the Wikipedia also provides us with some examples of misspellings such as asterix / asterisk, calvary / cavalry, etc. However, this is a superficial definition which refers to some misspellings in some words only.  It does not refer to how the concept of "metathesis"was used in manufacturing the IE languages. This is the crux of the matter!  Although, accidental misspellings cause some alteration in the form of a word, they cannot be regarded as significant when compared to the intentional "metathesis" that have been used in manufacturing the so-called "Indo-European" and "Semitic" languages from Turkish. 

METATHESIS is also defined as: 
"change of place, condition, etc.; specifically, transposition, as of the letters, sounds, or syllables of a word, as in Anglo-Saxon ascian, axian (cs = x)" [1, Webster, p. 629].

Again this definition of "metathesis" does not talk about intentional misspellings, but rather accidental alterations of the place of letters or syllables in a word.  Hence the given example is also superficial and is a coverup example. It does not refer to the real usage of "metathesis"as a tool of intentional transference of another language, namely Turkish, into European languages.  That is to say all of European languageas are the result of deliberate "metathesis" inflicted on the Turkish language.  This is the fact that is being deliberately ignored and covered up.

The Greek word METATHESIS is defined as 
"removal; transposition, transfer", [2, Divry, p. 588]. 

Greek META is defined as:
 "with; after" [2, Divry, p. 587]. 

Greek THESIS is defined as 
"place, position, situation", [2, Divry, p. 530].

With these basic definitions of META and THESIS, supposedly we are to understand that the word METATHESIS is a combination of "META" + "THESIS".  At this point, one needs to answer the question of; "how does one get the meanings attributed to "METATHESIS", that is, 
"removal; transposition, transfer"?  How do the "linguists" explain the reasoning behind it?  Although the word METATHESIS  embodies the "Greek" appearing META and THESIS, neither META nor THESIS nor the METATHESIS are Greek words at the source.  They are all usurped, altered and disguised from Turkish. For example we have the "Greek" word "METALLON meaning "metal".  It has the phoneme META in it, but this META does not mean "after" or "with".   This Greek word METALLON is actually made up form Turkish word MADEN-LU meaning "with metal".  Even the English word METAL, which gives the impression that it is from this Greek source, is an anagrammatized form of the Turkish word "MADEN" (meaning "metal") where Turkish N has been replaced with "L", that is,  a Caesar encryption has taken place. 

After having said all this, now I will explain the word "METATHESIS". 

When the "Greek" word METATHESIS is rearranged letter-by-letter as "TEISSMETH-A" (where SS is the altered Turkish letter Sh - which is an anagrammatizing trick that has been used in the makeup of the European languages, and Greek H is I, [Divry, p. 10]), we find the Turkish expression "DEYISMEDI O" (where the S is an Sh sound) meaning "it is changing", "it is altering", "it is transposing".  Thus, we have an exact correspondence  meaningwise and morphemwise between the so-called "Greek" word and this Turkish expression. We should not be finding such correspondence between non-related languages.  Unless somebody deliberately worked out the "Greek" word from this Turkish text.  And this is what I am saying took place.

Thus, the root for this "Greek" METATHESIS is the Turkish verb "deyismek" (teyismek) meaning "to change", where S is the Sh sound of Turkish language.  Derived from "deyismek" are the words:  "DEYIS" (TEYIS)  meaning "change", "DEYIS-ME" meaning"changing", and "DEYIS-ME-DI" meaning "it is changing", "it is altering". The reader should note how the word formation in Turkish is taking place with the regular addition of mono-syllabic suffixes to the root word. 

Alternatively, when the "Greek" word METATHESIS is rearranged letter-by-letter as "TASSIMETH-E", where Greek H is I and SS is the altered Turkish letter Sh, this time we find another very relevant Turkish expression "TASIMADI O" meaning "it is carrying", "it is transporting", "it is moving", "it is removing something from its position to another position". These meanings in Turkish are again embedded in this so-called "Greek" word METATHESIS and we have an exact correspondence between the "Greek" word and this Turkish text. Again we should not be finding this kind of exact correspondence, that is, if Greek and Turkish are two independently developed languages.  The root for "TASIMADI O" is the Turkish verb "tasimak" (where the S is the Sh sound) meaning "to carry", "to move".  Derived from this verb are the words: "TASI" meaning "carry", "TASI-MA" meaning "carrying", and "TASI-MA-DI" meaning "it is carrying", "it is transporting", "it is moving".  It must be noted that anything that is carried or moved from place to place is alsoremovable, transferable, transportable, and transpositionable - which is what METATHESIS is all about.

Evidently the Greek anagrammatisers chose one of these two Turkish expressions, that is, either "DEYISMEDI" or  "TASIMADI", as the source for the new word "METATHESIS" and then assigned the meanings of the Turkish source text or texts to "METATHESIS". Since the Turkish source text was subjected to a state of "metamorphosis", which is also another word made up from Turkish, the Turkish formats were broken, rearranged and distorted.  The resulting word lost all of its Turkish identity and took on a "Greek" word identity.  How convenient! How so very clever!, But nevertheless it was a fraud!.   The Greek anagrammatiser(s) not only stole the Turkish language without hesitation, but also conned the whole world saying that these words were from "Greek". Interestingly enough, the whole world accepted the presented sophistry completely. Not only that, they also suppressed the source language Turkish as an out of place language, and pushed forward the pseudo language "Greek" as the "source" language of the great "Greek" civilization. This is nothing but holding hands with the "usurper" of  the Turkish language and civilization. 

Now we must note that the two Turkish expressions, that is,  DEYISMEDI and TASIMADI given above, end with two suffixes each with one syllable, namely, "MA-DI" (MADI /MATI) or "MEDI" (METI). It must also be noted that the so-called "Greek" prefix META in the word"METATHESIS" and many other words starting with "META", is nothing but the Turkish ending MEDI / MADI which has been displaced from the end of the word in Turkish to the beginning of the word in "Greek" and other European languages. In other words Turkish "MEDI / MADI" has been "transposed" or "displaced", or "highjacked" or "metathesised", that is, or whatever you wish to call it, from its position at the end of a Turkish word to the beginning of the alien Greek word. What they have done, technically, may appear clever as a solution in making up words for an originally nonexistant but rather later constracted language of "Greek", but nevertheless, its source is Turkish!

Additionally, I must note that the supposedly "Greek" prefix META is also an emulation of at least two other Turkish words; namely, ITMEmeaning "pushing" and "ETME" meaning "acting upon".  In both cases, when something is "pushed" or "acted upon", changes are bound to take place on the position as well as the shape of the object being pushed or acted upon. Remember Newton's laws of motions!  Thus these two Turkish words are also likely sources for the term META  which implies movement, change, alteration.  Particularly, in the case of "word formation", META implies movement, change and alteration done on the words.  This means that those words that are acted upon have been deliberately changed. Thus "METATHESIS" is a synonym for "anagrammatizing". Words that are being"METATHESISed", that is, intentionally moved or changed or altered, have nothing whatsoever to do with probability.  When a "linguist" takes a Turkish word or phrase and manufactures a new word out of it and disguises it, the whole process is 100% intentional and therefore 0% probability is involved.


1.    Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth Edition, U.S.A., 1947.
2.    Divry's Modern English - Greek and Greek - English Dictionary, New York, 1988.

Best wishes to you and to all,

Polat Kaya


Petr Hrubis wrote:

Dear Mr Polat Kaya,


could you, please, give us the most general and regular step-by-step algorithm?


Id est, if metathesis takes place, how exactly does it function? I'm afraid your 'system' lacks the necessary regularity and you seem to be loosing the struggle against accidental similarity and the simple logic of mathematical probability.


Please, if you can, can you give us the general formulae of 'transforming' Turkish into other languages?


Best wishes,



----- Original Message ----
From: Polat Kaya <tntr@...>
Sent: Tuesday, 28 November, 2006 3:51:57 PM
Subject: Re: [hrl_2] I would like to see examples of internal derivations of Turkish words

Dear David and Friends,

Hi.  Please do give structured morphology examples from English, Hebrew, Greek and Latin.  This way we will all know what we are talking about.

Turkish is essentially a monosyllabic language in which mono syllables are the root words and suffixes. It is an agglutinative language in which many words are derived by adding many suffixes to the root word (almost with mathematical regularity).  It is like building a wall with bricks of different colors.  Each additional one, two or three lettered suffix, added to the root word, changes the meaning of the word with great refinement.  It must be noted that in my writings in this forum, I am not writing about  morphology and grammatical aspects of Turkish language because they are well documented in Turkish grammar books. To see and enjoy the  morphology of words with extreme regularity in Turkish, one needs to study Turkish language from a Turkish grammar book. 

The mathematical simplicity and precision of word formation in Turkish alone is suffucient to qualify Turkish as the Original Language.  There is no question in my mind that Turkish was the Original Language and I have given many examples to validate this fact.  Additionally, I have been saying in almost every writing that the "Indo-European" languages, starting with Greek, Latin, English, Italian, etc., plus the Semitic languages, are all artificially made up by using Turkish as a model language where Turkish words and phrases were restructured into these languages by "Hellenizing", "Romanizing", "Anglicising", "Semitizing", "naturalizing", etc.  Since these languages, manufactured from Turkish, have structured morphology - as you say, the model language that they were made from, i.e., Turkish, surely has structured morphology.

Best wishes to you and to all,

Polat Kaya

David L wrote:

I would think that many Turkish words are derived from other Turkish 
words, that they have an internal derivation, so they have a 
structured morphology.  Classical Greek has a structured morphology, 
Latin has a structured morphology, Ancient Hebrew has a structured 
morphology, Classical Arabic has a structured morphology.
If a language is believed to be the Original Language, then it 
probably has one of the more internally derived forms, that many of 
the words are derived from other words in the language, and such a 
language has few root words.
I think to prove that a language is ancient or original you must prove 
that it is highly ordered in derivational morphology.  I can give many 
examples from English, and many from Ancient Hebrew, but it is the 
Ancient Hebrew examples that are more ordered.  If Turkish has a 
simplicity and regularity and internally derived morphology, then may 
be it could be the Original Language.