Re: [bcn2004] Re:
[Polat_Kaya] Words under the lens: English word "KNUCKLEHEAD".
Dear Ganggon,
Hi. Thank you for your reply. My reply is a bit slow. I am
not a fast responder.
1. You said:
"HiThank you for your reply, but I think you missed my point.I wrote one sentence:"
Polat Kaya: No, I did not miss your point. In fact I
questioned what you said: "With all due
respect, knucklehead is not a disguised ancient Turkish word, unless someone
did it during WW2". I asked you "will
you please explain how you came to this very strong pronouncement?"
Furthermore, I answered almost all of your points line-by-line.
Yet, in this reply of yours, you ignored all of my explanations and additional
evidences I had provided in my first reply. For
example, I told you that both the English term "knuckle" and
German term "knöckel" were made up from Turkish expression
"EL KEMIGI". I also said that even the
German word "KOPF", meaning "head",
was from Turkish "KAFA" meaning "head".
Furthermore, I noted that another meaning associated with the word
"knuckle" (knöckel), was also from a Turkish source.
2. You said:
"My point is that word (knucklehead) was not used in English until the period of World War II. It did not exist as a word in English before WW2.Therefore, if it did not exist as a word until 70 years ago, it could not have been derived from an ancient Turkish phrase, anagramized or not."
Polat Kaya: So basically what you are telling me is:
a) the term "knucklehead" did not exist in the English
language until the WW2 time period.
b) and since it did not exist in English until 70 years ago,
according to your logic, it could not have been derived from an ancient Turkish
phrase, anagrammatized or not.
Your rationale is faulty! Of course an English word that was generated 70
years ago could have been sourced from an ancient Turkish word! An
English word that is generated today can even be sourced from an ancient
Turkish word! Surely those doing the anagrammatizing from Turkish must
have a list of Turkish words - whether they are ancient or middle or modern.
They can pick and choose their source as they please. And then they can
fabricate whatever they want as an etymology - because they know nobody is
going to question it.
Your insistence on the word formation time of "70 years ago" has no
relevance on the "structuring" of an English word from Turkish. If
this term "knucklehead" existed in English, say, 200 years ago, would
that make it eligible to have been derived from an ancient Turkish phrase? What
does 70 years have to do with the word being anagrammatized from Turkish or
not? Nothing! All you are doing is saying that it could not be done that
way - without giving a valid reason.
Also, it seems that false information is being disseminated regarding the "birth
date" of
each English word - as if there was an organization keeping
day-to-day records of the birth and usage of each word in English. Is
there such an organization that keeps records of all new words in English -
compiling the date, when, where and how they were generated? Or is it
really a bogus alibi offered to readers so that they are manipulated to accept
their "explanation"?
I see you are playing games on my use of the word "ancient"
versus possibly a choice of "old" or "modern"
Turkish. If I had not used the adjective "ancient", what
I said would still be true. Although, the term "knucklehead" may not
be an "ancient" term in English, the Turkish words "çok"
and "dangalak"
are "ancient" words. They have been used in the Turkish
language since at least the time of the Ottoman Empire. This puts a usage
history on these Turkish words at least in the order of some 500 years or
longer - which is 'ancient' when compared to the present times.
3. You said:
"The fact that you have been able to show that you can rearrange letters in a word from WW2 and make it look like it came from ancient Turkish indicates that this particular 'theft' of a Turkish word is fabricated."
Polat Kaya: It is not because I am playing some
sort of a game. The IE words themselves contain the ciphered Turkish
source information - which I am recovering by deciphering them. This is
exactly what happens in modern communication. The transmitting side
intentionally encrypts the transmitted information (so that unwanted eyes do
not see the information) and the receiving side decodes it - with prearranged
knowledge. This is all that I am doing too. When I see a particular
IE word and I detect that a related Turkish word's or phrase's components are
embedded in it, I can readily solve the Turkish source content of that IE
word. There is no deception in that!
You must see that "knucklehead" and "çok
dangalak" do not look alike. The first word has been
anagrammatized from the second in such a way that they do not resemble each
other. That
"dissimilarity" is provided by the technique of
"anagrammatization". That is the purpose of anagrammatization -
to be able to take words from a source and alter/rearrange/camouflage it such
that the newly fabricated word doesn't look anything like the source - and
therefore can be claimed as their own - without anyone becoming
suspicious. I happened to discover this very secretive linguistic
activity that has been used for thousands of years for generating words for IE
and some other languages. And I am now sharing my discovery.
4. You said:
"Someone can't take a word from 70 years ago, switch the letters around and expect anyone to believe that it came from the ancient Turkish language."
Polat Kaya: I have written about words that
are more than 2000 years old and still shown that they were manufactured from
Turkish. The
"70 years" you keep talking about has no bearing on the
anagrammatization process. So this argument of yours is faulty. I
can see that you have a problem in accepting what I am demonstrating - but that
is your problem - definitely not mine!
On the other hand, for the person(s) doing the anagrammatizing, it is
a totally different story. Someone can take an ancient (or
recent) word
or phrase, restructure the text as he pleases, come up with a word in a new
format - and assign it a meaning that comes from the phrase it was fabricated
from - and claim it as his own. The thief knows that if he steals a word
or an expression in this manner from Turkish, no one will notice this
"theft" or even know the difference - because what is stolen is not a
physical object. Therefore nothing appears to be
"missing". Words are not like a jacket or a car. If my
jacket or car is stolen, I will sense it because something physical that I use
daily is missing! It is not like that with words and phrases. No one can
sense that behind closed doors, someone is manipulating Turkish words to
fabricate new words for English - or other languages. It is because of
this invulnerability that the anagrammatizer does the "theft" and
gets away with it. This is the motivation why he does what he does best.
Even the "car" thief would change at least the color of the stolen
car in order to make it unrecognizable. Anagrammatizing a word or phrase
is like repainting the stolen car but it is very difficult for
'linguists' to recognize this alteration and make a linguistic connection
between the fabricated word and its source text. That is the very reason
that 'anagramatizing' is the perfect linguistic stealing technique. Countless
numbers of IE words have been manufactured on this basis from Turkish words and
phrases - old and new.
As one follower of my writings, you know that I have also shown that many words
from Greek, Latin, English and other so-called "Indo-European" (IE)
languages have also been fabricated in this manner. So far, I have heard objections,
but without any valid and rational explanation proving me wrong. I am afraid
you are no exception. But, I am glad that you are raising your voice,
but, I must also say that your rational is "no rational" as it lacks
logic. I
am afraid in the make up of languages and together with it in many other
subjects the world people has been conned like children by few very secretive
working organization, most likely by the religious ones throughout the
history.
5. You said:
"This also casts a shadow on the other words that you accuse other people of 'stealing' from ancient Turkish because if you can make the case for a word that did not even exist in ancient times who is to say that it isn't made up for all the other words you have 'translated.'"
Polat Kaya: Not at all! The source Turkish
word I presented in this discussion and the ones in previous presentations
existed in Turkish, irrespective of when they were anagrammatized into English
and/or other IE languages. Time is irrelevant in anagrammatization of a
word. Similarly, "manufacturing" of English words from
"Turkish" is not "time" dependent. Any word in English
could have been manufactured from Turkish at any time without any time
condition put on it. Most likely it is still going on. Turkish
is a very old and progenitor language. It has been used as the source data base
for many languages, which includes the IE languages, contrary to the
misinformation provided by all kinds of sources.
In the words that I analyze, I give the word, its meaning, its letter-by-letter
decoding and the resulting corresponding Turkish words and phrases, with their
meanings in English, that have been used to manufacture the alien
word. Thus, everything I do is open for scrutiny by the interested readers.
Contrary to what you say, I do not "translate" English words or any
other word, I "decode" what has been intentionally confused
(encrypted) from Turkish by some word anagrammatizers. Your using the
term "translate" is misleading. With the IE words, I am recovering
the used and confused Turkish texts that no one suspected before were
usurped.
Since you show so much doubt, let us, for example, analyze the word "anagrammatization".
The word "anagrammatization" is supposedly from the word
"anagram" which is defined as "a word, phrase, or
name formed by rearranging the letters of another". The
ORIGIN of the word is said to be "late 16th cent.: from French anagramme or
modern Latin anagramma,
from Greek ana- ‘back,
anew’ +
gramma- ‘letter.’"
I say this "etymology" is bogus and the real source of the word is
Turkish. Let us now look at this English word
"anagrammatization":
The English word ANAGRAMMATIZATION, rearranged
letter-by-letter as "O-GIRMA-ANATAN-TIZME" or "O-GIRMA-ENITAN-TAZMA",
is an anagrammatized form of the Turkish expression "O
GIRMA ENITEN TIZME" (O KIRMA YENIDEN DIZME) meaning "it
is breaking and rearranging from anew", that is, "it
is breaking and restructuring into a new word". This
Turkish source phrase clearly defines the word ANAGRAMMATIZATION and
the concept it represents.
In this deciphering of the word "anagrammatization",
the Turkish words O means "it;
it is", GIR
(KIR) means "break", GIRMA
(KIRMA) means "breaking", YENI means "new", YENIDEN means "from
anew, from a new", DEN/DAN
(TEN/TAN) suffix
means "from", DIZME means "putting
in an order". Thus all the elements of the Turkish expression are
listed here for benefit of the readers. There is no magic here.
Everything is open and on top of the table - and clearly explained.
But from all of this, you cannot deny the fact that I recovered a Turkish
phrase blended into this English word "anagrammatization".
The English word and Turkish phrase both have the same lettering and the
same meaning. The Turkish phrase is not a "translation" of the
English word as you wrongly state. The recovered Turkish phrase is a
definition of the English word but in Turkish rather than Greek or Latin or
French. The
recovered Turkish phrase says that the meaning of this English word is: "it
is breaking and rearranging from anew" which
is the meaning attributed to this English word. How do you think this
correspondence is possible? Coincidence? No way!!!
So there has been a con game being perpetrated to the unsuspecting public.
As
I said before the anagrammatized Turkish word or phrase defining the concept
represented by an IE word does not get lost but is hidden in the newly
restructured word. If one knows what to do, the original phrase and even
different related ones in Turkish can be recovered as I have demonstrated to
you all.
This example is unquestionable proof that the source phrase used to manufacture
this word has been stolen from Turkish. They have done the same for many
other words. Why would they stop at one word? After all,
"anagrammatizing" is not only the most perfect word generating
technique for so-called "inflectional" languages, but also is the
most perfect stealing technique from another language. In this case the
'other language' has been the Turkish language throughout history!
In view of all this, you saying that: "This also
casts a shadow on the other words that you accuse other people of 'stealing'
from ancient Turkish because if you can make the case for a word that did not
even exist in ancient times who is to say that it isn't made up for all the
other words you have 'translated.'" is not a valid
argument. I suggest you read and think very carefully about what I am illustrating
to you - and be truthful to yourself. Because simply denying the
factuality of what I am saying will not invalidate it.
6. You said:
"If I missed something about the distinction between ancient and modern Turkish and you truly believe that the word knucklehead was stolen from Turkish during WW2, then I apologize for wasting your time. It is difficult for me to believe that a group of American GIs sat around and decided to steal a new word from Turkish with so much else going on.ganggon "
Polat Kaya: Yes, you are missing the point!
Read carefully what I wrote. I have not mentioned anywhere in my writing
about WW2 military people making up this English word
from ancient Turkish or modern Turkish; nor did I ever say that the word
knucklehead was stolen from Turkish during WW2. Now, you are artificially
introducing these things that have no relevance to the alteration of the
Turkish phrase "çok
dangalak" into the English term "knucklehead".
The WW2 time period is only your claim and has no importance to me
or to the discussion of the generation of this word.
Surely, you do not expect me to approve this fallacious statement that you have
formulated in your mind. It is a bit too forward of you to ask me
to sign your misleading statement.
What I said and what I am saying is that the Turkish phrase "çok
dangalak" was stolen and anagrammatized into the word
"knucklehead". The linguistic makeup of this word "knucklehead" proves
my claim. Therefore, I am not going to say "yes" to a faulty and
misleading argument of yours. You are defending a falsehood that has been
used to generate languages from the progenitor language of Turkish. Words
from many different sources that I have analysed clearly indicate that all
kinds of words have been generated from Turkish by way of anagrammatizing
Turkish words and phrases. The term "knucklehead" is not an
exception.
I say that both the Turkish words "çok" meaning "many;
very" and the word "dangalak" meaning "stupid"
are old words in Turkish, therefore, they are ancient for me. But I
cannot tell you when they were put together in a 'phrase' and anagrammatized
into "knucklehead". I have no office that records the birth
date of each Turkish word or any of the words of other languages - like the
English language words seem to have. On top of this, I truly believe that
the source of this English word is from Turkish - irrespective of whether you
believe it or not.
Furthermore, where did you get the notion that "American GIs"
generated "knucklehead"? I found no such claim in the internet.
Let me tell you that the GIs in WW2 could not have generated this word
in the middle of a raging war that was a life and death situation for them all.
Their job was not "word generation". Thus, your claim that it was the
GIs who generated this term "knucklehead" is wrong. In
my view, word generation for the Indo-European languages has been the work of
some secretive religious groups that have been among the top rulers of world
people, controlling and exploiting them for thousands of years.
Additionally, the world has been ruled and still is being controlled by words
used by the top echelons of such groups. They had all the time and
privacy in the world to generate words by anagrammatizing Turkish words and
expressions - whether ancient or modern.
Best wishes to you and all,
Polat Kaya
26/04/2010
Gangchen Gonpo wrote:
HiThank you for your reply, but I think you missed my point.I wrote one sentence:"With all due respect, knucklehead is not a disguised ancient Turkish word, unless someone did it during World War II."followed by information from a link that indicated the origins of the word 'knucklehead'.My point is that word (knucklehead) was not used in English until the period of World War II. It did not exist as a word in English before WW2.Therefore, if it did not exist as a word until 70 years ago, it could not have been derived from an ancient Turkish phrase, anagramized or not.The fact that you have been able to show that you can rearrange letters in a word from WW2 and make it look like it came from ancient Turkish indicates that this particular 'theft' of a Turkish word is fabricated. Someone can't take a word from 70 years ago, switch the letters around and expect anyone to believe that it came from the ancient Turkish language.This also casts a shadow on the other words that you accuse other people of 'stealing' from ancient Turkish because if you can make the case for a word that did not even exist in ancient times who is to say that it isn't made up for all the other words you have 'translated.'If I missed something about the distinction between ancient and modern Turkish and you truly believe that the word knucklehead was stolen from Turkish during WW2, then I apologize for wasting your time. It is difficult for me to believe that a group of American GIs sat around and decided to steal a new word from Turkish with so much else going on.ganggon--- On Sun, 4/18/10, Polat Kaya <tntr@...> wrote:Dear Gangchen Gonpo or Ganggon,Hi! Thank you for your response regarding my paper on "knucklehead" being from Turkish "çok dangalak" meaning "very stupid". My response to your e-mail is below and citings from your letter are in red. 1. You said:"With all due respect, knucklehead is not a disguised ancient Turkish word, unless someone did it during World War II."Polat Kaya: I do not deny that the word "knucklehead" is a term used in the English language. I was explaining how this word was made up. There are many words of the English language that have been made up from Turkish words and phrases. I have been writing about this for quite some time. The term "knucklehead" is not an exception. Whenever it was made up (anagrammatized) does not matter. The important thing is that it has been made up from a Turkish saying and in my paper I explained how it was done. Also, when you say that "knucklehead is not a disguised ancient Turkish word," will you please explain how you came to this very strong pronouncement? Surely you must have a rationale for your judgement. I would appreciate it if you would share that rationale with us. Obviously you know English but do you know Turkish? Do you know that there are endless numbers of words belonging to the so-called "Indo-European" (IE) languages that have been anagrammatized from Turkish words and phrases? 2. You said:"What brings the HDAS to mind is that "knucklehead," meaning a stupid or slow-witted person, is classic US slang dating back to the period of World War II. Apparently "knucklehead" arose as a variant of "bonehead," meaning that a stupid person has a thick skull impervious to listening or learning." Polat Kaya: What this is saying here is that "all stupid" persons have "thick skull bones", and that is why they cannot comprehend what people are telling them. This is a baseless explanation and "etymology". Did it ever occur to you that people use their "ears" to listen to what is being told to them? People do not listen with their skull bones. Their inability to understand what is being said can be due to so many different physical and psychological conditions - but definitely not the thickness or thinness of their skull bones! So your explanation again is far from being satisfactory. It is a diversion and sophistication. As for your saying "There's some evidence that "knucklehead" was originally military slang" again does not prove anything. In Turkish the use of "DANGALAK" meaning "stupid" is a general term that people use irrespective of being civil or military. It is a word that comes to present day at least from the times of the Ottoman empire. In other words, it has a long history in Turkish. 3. You also said:(The word "knuckle," meaning the end of a bone at a joint, itself comes from a Germanic root meaning "little bone.") There's some evidence that "knucklehead" was originally military slang."Polat Kaya: This implies that "knucklehead" is related to the word "knuckle" which is said to come from the Germanic source "knöckel". The make up of the Germanic source word for "knuckle" itself is suspicious though. The Collins German Concise Dictionary (German - English and "English - German), 1993, p. 250, defines "knöckel" as meaning "finger knuckle", that is, a "finger bone" - which it is. Now let us analyse this German word "knöckel". When we look at this word in two parts such as "knöck + el", we have the following situation:The word "EL" is the Turkish word "EL" meaning "hand". The word "knöck" is nothing but the anagrammatized form of the Turkish word "KEMIK" meaning "bone". So, the German word "knöckel" is also a made-up word - anagrammatized from the Turkish expression "EL KEMIKI" (kemik + el) meaning "hand bones". Indeed the fingers and finger bones and the knuckles are the bones of the "hand", that is, EL in Turkish. Neither you nor any other linguist can deny this fact!The English word "knuckle" is just another variation of the German word "knöckel", thus the English "knuckle" is also made up from Turkish "EL KEMIKI". You can see it inside "knuckle" if you look carefully.The letter N in "knöckel" or in "knuckle" is the Turkish letter "M" encrypted (changed) into letter "N" by means of the so-called "Caesar Ciphering", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_cipher. This is one of the encryption (camouflaging) tricks that has been widely used in manufacturing endless numbers of Indo-European words from Turkish words and expressions. Using this trick obliterates the original form and identity of the Turkish source material in the newly manufactured IE word. However I must point out that the original Turkish source text is still present in the newly manufactured IE word - although in a confused form. In other words, the original source text is not lost - meaning that it can be recovered - if one knows what to do. I have given countless numbers of IE word examples in my Polat Kaya Library. Thus your referencing a Germanic word as a source for the English word "knuckle" does not help your argument either because both are manufactured from Turkish - contrary to all kinds of deceptive verbology! These 2 examples (i.e., English "knuckle" and German "knöckel") are, of course, in addition to the original "knucklehead" that I said was from Turkish "çok dangalak" in my paper.Additionally, in German there is the term "Holzkopf" meaning "blockhead", that is, "wooden head" and not "bonehead". The German word "knöckel" does not seem to be used for referring to a "knucklehead". However, I will point out that the word "kopf", meaning "head", is nothing but an anagrammatized form of the Turkish word "kafa" meaning "head". You can see now how solid my argument is about the makeup of the IE languages.4. Furthermore, the Oxford American Dictionaries define the word "knuckle" with another meaning as follows:"PHRASES: knuckle under the hostages agreed that they would not knuckle under surrender, submit, capitulate, give in/up, yield, give way, succumb, back down, admit defeat, lay down one's arms, throw in the towel, climb down, quit, raise the white flag."The Oxford American Dictionary somehow connects the meanings of "surrender, submit, capitulate, give in/up, yield, give way, succumb, back down, admit defeat, etc., " with the finger bone "knuckle". Now, I ask you and all other linguists, to please tell me, how can anyone come up with a word that means all of these meanings with just the "finger bones"? I will tell you, though, how they could have come up with these double meanings for this word: Actually the word "knöckel" is the combination of two different Turkish words (expressions):One is the Turkish expression "EL KEMIK" as I mentioned above. The second is as follows:The word "KNUCKLE" or "KNÖCKEL", rearranged letter-by-letter as "CUKLEN-K" or "CUKELN-K" is the anagrammatized form of the Turkish word "ÇÖKÜLEN" meaning "it is that which buckles under pressure, it gives way, it submits, it surrenders, it bends under pressure". Now that makes perfect sense as the basis for the English and Germanic word "knuckle" meaning "to surrender, bend, twist, curve, distort, contort, deform; bulge, arc, arch; crumple, collapse, give way".So, in order for "knöckel" or "knuckle" to have these different meanings, the manufacturer of the word must have combined these two different Turkish sources into one word. Evidently these secret operators knew Turkish very well. They were definetely not knuckleheads. To conclude, I say that your comments are a nice try of sophistry, but, of course, they cannot be accepted as an explanation for the term "KNUCKLEHEAD" as it is based on totally wrong information. My explanation of "knucklehead" being made up from Turkish "ÇOK DANGALAK" is logical, rational and powerful. I do thank you for writing and sharing your views though. By the way, it seems I received another letter from you once before - but under a different name, even though the e-mail user-ID was the same. Because of the change in your name, it was not easy to recognize you. The point I am trying to make here is that altering names and words are very effective ways of obliterating history and the identity of people.Best wishes to you and to all,Polat Kaya18/04.2010Gangchen Gonpo wrote: Hi,With all due respect, knucklehead is not a disguised ancient Turkish word, unless someone did it during World War II.According to 'The Word Detective'(http://www.word-detective.com/092403.html) dated Sept. 24, 2003, 'kucklehead' is a word that has only been around since World War II. The following is an excerpt from the webpage:"What brings the HDAS to mind is that "knucklehead," meaning a stupid or slow-witted person, is classic US slang dating back to the period of World War II. Apparently "knucklehead" arose as a variant of "bonehead," meaning that a stupid person has a thick skull impervious to listening or learning. (The word "knuckle," meaning the end of a bone at a joint, itself comes from a Germanic root meaning "little bone.") There's some evidence that "knucklehead" was originally military slang."Do you have any evidence that shows the word knucklehead has been used since ancient times after being 'stolen' from Turkish?ganggon<tntr@...> wrote:Here is an interesting word in English that needs to be explored for its make up. It is the English word "knucklhead" that means "a stupid person", [Oxford American Dictionaries]. When this English word KNUCKLEHEAD is rearranged letter-by-letter as "CUH-DANKELEK" or "CUK-DANKELEH"and the deciphered word is read as in Turkish, it becomes obvious that it is an anagrammatized and Anglicized form of the Turkish expression "ÇOK DANGALAK" meaning "very stupid, blockhead, knucklehead". Clearly, this Turkish expression "ÇOK DANGALAK" has been stolen and used to manufacture this English word KNUCKLEHEAD. Thus, this is another example that, regarding the authenticity of "Indo-Europan" languages, the Turks and the rest of the world public have been misled by the manufacturers and presenters of such languages. Of course, by such activities, not only are the Turkish language words and expressions stolen, but also the linguistic creations of the Turkish people, hence, Turkish civilization is stolen. This kind of stealing from the ancient Turanian language of Turkish and the ancient Turanian civilization has been going on since the time of the Babylonians, that is, for at least the last 4,000 years. The truth about world languages is not as it appears - or as it is presented to us. Linguistically, this cannot be ignored. It is time that linguists who work on the "etymology" of words to take note of this ongoing deception. Best wishes to all,Polat Kaya15/04/2010--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Polat Kaya