Re: phrygian (Digest Number 42) (Mark Newbrook)

--- In bcn2003-II@yahoogroups.com, Polat Kaya <tntr@C...> wrote:

Dear friends,

This is my response to Mark Newbrook's comment just below:

> --- In historical_linguistics@yahoogroups.com, Mnewbroo@a... wrote:
> Most of what is known of Phrygian is clearly Indo-European.
>
> Mark Newbrook

Actually, what is known as Phrygian and claimed as "clearly Indo-
European" needs to be proven and demonstrated first. Merely
blurting "Most of what is known of Phrygian is clearly Indo-European."
without any justification does not make it so. What is going on here
is that someone is trying to hammer a stick into the ground with "PIE"
stamped on it. The term PIE (Proto Indo-European) is a loaded acronym
and implies, in a disguised way, that the source of todays Indo-
European languages was also Indo-European. The term PROTO,
meaning "first in time", "first in status", "chief in rank or
importance", is an anagram of Turkish BIR-ATA meaning "first
father". The BIR-ATA or first-father for the ancient Turanians was
the Sky-God OGUZ who was, as the creator God, "chief in rank or
importance", "first in status" and "first in time". Hence BIR-ATA
also denotes ANCESTRY. The term PROTO, as in PROTO-LANGUAGE, denotes
ANCESTRY too. This demonstrates how close the meaning of PROTO and
the meaning of Turkish BIR-ATA coincide.

As I have demonstrated many times, the Indo-European languages
were manufactured from Turkish. Thus the PROTO (BIR-ATA) language
was Turkish and not so called Indo-European. Hence, Phrygian is much
more likely to be Turkish than "Indo-European" as the Phrygian name
GORDIUM so clearly indicates.

Best wishes,

Polat Kaya

August 24, 2003