RESOLVING ONE NATIVE AYMARAN AND SEVERAL NATIVE INUKTITUT
LANGUAGE EXPRESSIONS AND FINDING THEIR MAKE UP BEING
FROM THE TURKISH LANGUAGE
By POLAT KAYA
This study is about an Aymaran saying and four Inuktitut sayings which are referred to as a “word” by the researchers. Two of these words are given in a research paper by the authors Kenneth R. Beesley and Lauri Karttunen.
These authors explain in their paper an interesting subject regarding computer based word formations into non-concatenative languages from agglutinative languages like Aymara or Turkish, and in agglutinative/polysynthetic languages like Inuktitut, where a single word may contain as many morphemes as an average-length English sentence. This is very interesting in the context where I have been saying that the so-called Indo-European and Semitic languages have been fabricated from the words and expressions of the Turkish language. Similarly the native languages of the world are not native any more, but rather are mostly reformatted languages from the original proto-language of the world- that is, Turkish! In this study, we will see a few examples of this.
Below, we have the title and the url address of a study carried out by the authors Kenneth R. Beesley and Lauri Karttunen:
Finite-State Non-Concatenative Morphotactics
Kenneth R. Beesley and Lauri Karttunen
SIGPHON-2000, Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop of the ACL
Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology, p. 1-12,
August 6, 2000,
Finite-state morphology in the general tradition of the Two-Level and Xerox implementations has proved very successful in the production of robust morphological analyzer-generators, including many large-scale commercial systems. However, it has long been recognized that these implementations have serious limitations in handling non-concatenative phenomena. We describe a new technique for constructing finite-state transducers that involves reapplying the regular-expression compiler to its own output. Implemented in an algorithm called compile-replace, this technique has proved useful for handling non-concatenative phenomena; and we demonstrate it on Malay full-stem reduplication and Arabic stem interdigitation.
Most natural languages construct words by concatenating morphemes together in strict orders. Such “concatenative morphotactics” can be impressively productive, especially in agglutinative languages like Aymara (Figure 11) or Turkish, and in agglutinative/polysynthetic languages like Inuktitut (Figure 2)[Mallon1999, 2]. In such languages a single word may contain as many morphemes as an average-length English sentence.
The below figure is an Aymara word dissected by the authors into parts and translated into an English meaning.
utamankapxasamachiwa = "it appears that they are in your house"
Finite-State Non-Concatenative Morphotactics
web.stanford.edu392 × 237Search by image
Figure 1: Aymara: UTAMANKAPXASAMACHİWA = "it appears that they are in your house"”
Polat Kaya: The authors Kenneth R. Beesley and Lauri Karttunen, in their above referenced article, mention the Aymara and Turkish languages as being agglutinative languages as most natural languages construct words by concatenating morphemes together in strict orders. This statement is correct in the case of Turkish. Probably this statement would also be correct in the case of the Aymara language when it was in its most original format – not the version that is presented in the paper. It seems that the Aymara language has gone through some intentional modifications. This we see, when we examine the single Aymara word that the authors have analyzed in their study. They have shown one very long Aymara “word” with an English translated meaning given to it. Also given is the dissected form of the same Aymara word:
I. UTA-MA-N-KA-P-XA-SAMACH-I-WA meaning "it appears that they are in your house"
This very complicated looking and long Aymara word appears to be mixed up in the sense that when I investigate it in a right-to-left reading fashion, I find faint traces of Turkish words having similar meanings to the English translation of this Aymara word. Similarly, when I investigate it in a left-to-right reading fashion, I again find faint traces of Turkish words having similar meanings to the English translation. This brings doubt into the authenticity of this Aymara word. Why should I find these Turkish language sensations embedded in this Aymara word? Could it be that what we have here is a Turkish sentence that has been heavily altered and presented to the world as an Aymara word?
In this example, we see the linguists take the so-called Aymara 20-character long word and parse it into some syllables – where they assign a meaning to each parsed component (see above).
In their explanation, it seems that the so-called parsed term SAMACH has not been accurately defined in the translation. Thus, the meaning of the Aymara word has been altered somewhat. I say this, because I recognize the so called Aymara term “SAMACH” as being the altered form of the Turkish word “AÇMIŞ” meaning “someone has opened”. Yet in the English translation, they have assigned a meaning of “APPARENTLY” to the parsed term SAMACH. Apparently, the Turkish word “AÇMIŞ” has been altered into the form “SAMACH” and its meaning has been changed into something that has no relation to its Turkish meaning! The remaining other parsed components of the Aymara word have also been mixed up.
Below, I give the full explanation of this supposedly AYMARA word and show that it was originally a Turkish sentence before it was disfigured and alienated from its Turkish identity. I start with the lexical and surface identifications provided by the authors.
SURFACE: UTA MAN KAP XA SAM-ACH I WA
Here are the parts of this so-called AYMARA saying and their corresponding Turkish words:
UTA: is from Turkish word ODA meaning “room”.
UTAM: is from Turkish word ODAM meaning “my room”.
UTAMAN: is from Turkish word ODAMIN meaning “of my room”.
KAP: is from Turkish word KAPI meaning “door”.
KAPIXA: is from Turkish word KAPIYI or KAPISI meaning “the door”.
KAPXA: is from Turkish word KAPIYI meaning “the door”.
ACH: is from Turkish root word AÇ meaning “open”.
ACHMAS or ACMASH: is from Turkish word AÇMIŞ meaning “has opened”.
The so called parsed term “SAMACHA” is the altered and reversed form of the Turkish word AÇMIŞ meaning “someone has opened”. Thus we see that this term “SAMACHA” has no relation with the assigned translation of “apparently”
IWA: is from Turkish word AVİ meaning “the house”.
Hence, in view of my identifications in Turkish of each word, I now rewrite the original AYMARA saying:
SURFACE: “UTA MAN KAP XA SAM-ACH I WA” (supposedly meaning "it appears that they are in your house" according to the authors Kenneth R. Beesley and Lauri Karttunen)
in a new form which reads in Turkish, left-to-right in the order that it appears: “ODAMIN KAPISI AÇMIŞ EVİ”. In a correct way of saying in Turkish, this would be: “EV ODAMIN KAPISINI AÇMIŞ” meaning “in the house, someone has opened the door of my room”!
The meaning “it appears that they are in your house" given by the authors of the paper, is very much the same as the meaning of the Turkish expression I gave, although, the one given by the authors of the paper is somewhat skewed (i.e., misrepresented)!
As the original Aymara word is physically presented to us, we can see no obvious connection with the Turkish language. Yet, I have just shown that the above given “Aymara” word is very much a form of Turkish. It appears that the Aymara language was originally a form of Turkish, that was intentionally altered into a different format by some people!
Polat Kaya: Rewriting the same Aymara text “AWİ OTAMAN KAPXA ACHMAS” as deciphered into Turkish would be:
“EV ODAMIN KAPISINI AÇMIŞ” meaning “someone has opened the door of my room in the house”. Surely if you found the door of your house open, you would be correct in concluding that someone is either, in your room (house), or that, someone was in your room (house)! From my many studies of Aryan words, I have discovered that Aryan (e.g., Greek, English, French, Latin) words were fabricated from words and expressions of the Turkish language. When fabricating Aryan words, the original Turkish text would be mutilated, rearranged, letters would be displaced or deleted or some new parts would be added, letters were upshifted and downshifted in the alphabet, vowels were changed, and many other actions were employed in order to disguise the Turkish source material. And they were very effective at it. It seems that a similar alteration has been done here in the formation of this Aymara word as well. Originally, the so-called “Aymara” people were the Turkish speaking Turanians contrary to denials! But presently the languages of the native peoples have been altered and alienated from their original Turanian Turkish identity!
II. The second term that I want to analyze is an Inuktitut term dealt with by the same authors in their paper shown below:
“Figure 2: Inuktitut: PARİMUNNGAUJUMANİRALAUQSİMANNGİTTUNGA = “I never said I wanted to go to Paris”
Surface: PARİ MU NNGAU JUMA NİRA L AUQ SİMA NNG İT TUNGA
The authors have subdivided this Inuktitut word PARİMUNNGAUJUMANİRALAUQSİMANNGİTTUNGA as follows:
Paris = (root = Paris)
+mut = terminalis case ending
+nngau = go (verbalizer)
+juma = want
+niraq = declare (that)
+lauq = past
+sima = (added to -lauq- indicates "distant past")
+nngit = negative
+junga = 1st person sing. present indic (nonspecific)”
Polat Kaya: From the
explanations given above, we find that these very alien looking terms have the
meanings shown and it appears that they are concatenated to each other in a disorderly
fashion. Yet my analysis reveals that this very long İnuktitut ‘word’ is in
fact a long Turkish sentence which needs to be deciphered!
The Inuktitut term PARİMUNNGAUJUMANİRALAUQSİMANNGİTTUNGA is a 37 character long ‘word’ where even the name PARIS has been altered. It is likely that the rest of the term has also been made up from an original native expression that was heavily altered and mixed up! With the help of its given meaning, that is, “I never said I wanted to go to Paris” and also using the Lexical form, that is, “PARİS+MUT+NNGAU+JUMA+NİRAQ+LAUQ+SİMA+NNGİT+JUNGA”
I have deciphered this Inuktitut term into Turkish, letter-by-letter as follows:
a) First decipherment into Turkish:
In this decipherment into Turkish, what we find is a sentence that is a likely dialect of the Turkish language. As we can see, the original structure of the Turkish sentence has been totally destroyed and intentionally made unrecognizable by way of using anagram and encrypting techniques. Many letters in the original Turkish sentence have been altered and replaced with different letters using Caesar cipher encryption. In order to come up with the proper Turkish sentemce, we can replace the altered consonants NN with M, J with S, G with D, Q with K and some of the U vowels with vowel Ü and in this process, we go through the following steps:
b) “MAN-PARİSA-GİTMAK- İSTAKUMU-SUİLAMADUM– GUNJR”
c) Finally, in Turkish: “MEN PARİS’E GİTMEK İSTEĞÜMÜ SÖYLEMEDÜM GÜNER”
which means: “I did not tell my wish to go to Paris - Güner”
In the lexical structure, where the sentence has been parsed into its parts, the quantity of the used letters are numbered as follows:
A= 7 M = 3 U = 5
G = 3 N = 6 S = 2
İ = 4 P = 1 T = 2
J = 2 R = 2
L = 1 Q= 2
In this Turkish sentence, I also parsed the sentence into its parts, that is, the words as follows:
MEN means “I”
PARİS is the name of the capital city of France
PARİS’E means “to Paris”
GİTMEK means “to go”
İSTEK means “wish”
İSTEĞ-ÜM means “my wish”
İSTEĞ-ÜM-Ü means “the wish of mine”
SÖYLE means “tell”
SÖYLE-ME means “do not tell”
SÖYLE-ME-DÜM means “I did not tell”
GÜNER” is a personal Turkish name for men meaning “sun-man”
The name “GÜNER” seems to be the first name of a second person to whom the first person is relating the story. But it is not mentioned in the translation given by the authors of the paper. In order to increase the confusion and the disguising of the source Turkish sentence, such unnecessary packaging material are generally used in constructing Aryan and Semitic words from Turkish words and expressions. In this case, the resulting confused, disguised and concatenated words are combined into one long unreadable, un-understandable and unspeakable word which has been identified as a word of the INUKTİTUT language in this study! The authors try to enlighten us by describing the Inuktitut languages as “agglutinative/polysynthetic languages”! In other words, such rearranged “Native Languages” are not the original ancient Turanian Native Language of Turkish anymore. They have been altered, that is, they have been linguistically reengineered - (i.e., false or artificial or made-up or fabricated from the model language of Turkish) - and thus, they are polysynthetic as the authors say. Hence, they are not original any more!
A SYNTHETİC item, that is, things or even words, means that the new item is “made up, false, artificial, not original, copied from some other things or language, or poor quality”. The term “POLYSYNTHETİC” as applied to languages means “plenty synthetic”. In other words, that the words of that language are made up from another language by way of breaking the words or sentences of an original and natural source language and then concatenating the broken pieces back together after attaching new meanings to each broken part. Thus coming up with a fabricated word for an engineered artificial language. Contary to false claims, all the Indo-European and Semitic, and most likely other languages as well, are such “polysynthetic” and artificial languages. I showed above that both the Aymara word and the Inuktitut words, as presented to us, were artificially made up words.
For example, when I decipher the English term SYNTHETİC into Turkish, letter-by-letter, as “SYNİ-ETTHC”, I find this so-called Aryan term is actually an altered (i.e., parts are renamed and then concatenated together) Turkish saying “SUNİ ETTİK” meaning “we made it artificial”. That is to say, it is made false, it is fabricated, the source concept and the words and expressions have been taken from Turkish! Turkish word “SUNİ” means “artificial, false, synthetic” and “ETTİK” means “we did it, we made it”.
Similarly, the term “POLYSYNTHETİC” is also an artificially fabricated word. Supposedly, the prefix “POLY” is a Greek word. This term on the surface looks like a “Greek” term, but contrary to falsely spread information, it is a term that has been fabricated from Turkish word “BOL” meaning “plenty, a lot” and the Turkish word “O” which has been altered first to letter “U” and then to “Y”. Thus the source is the Turkish saying “BOL O” meaning “it is plenty, it is very much”. With these explanations, we see that the so-called “English” word “POLYSYNTHETİC” is also a word that has been fabricated from the Turkish saying “ONU BOL SUNİ ETTİK” meaning “we made it plenty artificial”, that is, “it is not the original, it is heavily concocted.”
Now, while the linguistic facts are this, the authors implying that “naturally agglutinative Turkish is a “polysynthetic language” is distorting the facts and deceiving the public! First of all, Turkish is neither a polysynthetic or a synthetic language. TURKISH IS THE ORIGINAL SINGLE LANGUAGE THAT OTHER LANGUAGES HAVE BEEN FABRICATED FROM! On the contrary, it is Indo-European languages, for example, that are polysynthetic. In this regard, the public of the world has been conned for thousands of years!!!
III. POLYSYNTHETIC LANGUAGE:
V. Inuktitut word UQALIMAAQTINUT
I also found the following Inuktitut saying: UQALIMAAQTINUT which is translated into English as: “Dear Readers”. (Inuktitut, No. 85, 1999, p. 3)
In view of the above analysis, we can say that the Native languages, not only in the Americas, but everywhere, are not as they are presented to us. The findings in this paper, in addition to my many other writings on the web, indicate that ancient natives were speaking at least a dialect of Turkish. Turkish was the world-wide spoken language of the ancient Turanians. At some point in time, when the new religions spread into the world, their missionaries were very active in changing the identities, the languages, their religious beliefs in the sun-worshipping sky deities religion (Sky God, Sun God and Moon God) and other cultural identities of the natives everywhere. What we have today is a deliberately distorted view of the ancient world as said (i.e., admitted) in “Isaiah 65:17 - “For here I am creating new heavens and a new earth, and the former things will not be called to mind, neither will they come up into the heart.” With the help of my research, the former things are coming back into the minds and hearts of people.
With my best wishes to all,
October 06, 2018
Note: This is Part-1 of a study that I have been working on since October 23, 2012 off and on until present.