No. 7) Re: [hrl_2] Dr. Kaya, I found paper you posted in a group called historical linguistics

To: David L.

With your posting below, you just postulated an artificial problem
and you want me to solve it for you. Instead of studying in depth and
understanding what I am saying, you keep twisting things around.
I do not have time to deal with such superficiality. I wrote a very
detailed and easy to understand paper that demonstrated the Turkish
sources for about fourteen words you specified plus many other words
related to them. Yet somehow you completely failed in understanding
the contents of my paper and responded to it with a flimsy posting.
And now you came up with another flimsy postulate.

There is nothing "irregular" about Turkish "elements". Turkish is the
source language for many others particularly the Indo-European (IE) and
Semitic languages as I have demonstrated so many times. The languages
whose words have been anagrammatized from Turkish are the "irregular"
ones, not the Turkish language. It is IE and Semitic words that contain
rearranged consonants with rearranged or distorted vowels that were
sourced from Turkish words and phrases. That is why, with respect to
Turkish, they are irregular. As can be seen there is no logic in the
morphology of Greek or English and other IE languages as well. This is
so because they are "cut and paste" languages contrary to all the
disinformation floating around. Now, by using sophisticated, deceptive
and defective logic, you are trying to turn the tables around and associate
Turkish with irregularity, anagrammatizing and transposing, trying to
give the false impression that it was Turkish that was made from

I understand it is hard for you and for some others to accept the fact
that IE and Semitic languages are artificially manufactured languages
from Turkish, but this is due to the fact that the ancient world has
been misrepresented with all kinds of lop-sided propaganda material to
shape people into believing a false identity picture of the ancient
world. The ancient Greek and the Semitic world have been falsely
pumped up while ignoring the real contributors of the ancient civilization,
that is, the Tur/Turk peoples whose civilization was usurped by these

I have told you everything in a very straight forward fashion, and all
along you have said that you agreed with the correspondences that I
showed, yet now you seem to make a U-turn and pretend you did not
here them. There has already been an artificial confusion applied to
Turkish starting from ancient Babylon times. Probably from other
religious centers as well. It appears that you want the same confusion
to be carried on forever. If you were truthful, you would admit the fact
that Turkish was the most ancient language and that theTuranian religion
was the first religion of mankind. The Semitics did not introduce to the
world the so-called "Monotheism" as they claim. On the contrary, it was
the so-called "Pagan" religion that is, the religion of the ancient Tur/Turk
peoples that was villified and demonized by the cabalistic religious groups
in order to advance their newly introduced cults.

Your postulate below is wrong and and not even well formulated.

If A, B, C, D are sourced from an intermediary language T' derived from
language T (Turkish), then why is there a need for the intermediary
language of T'? Where is T' now? Why cannot T be T and T' at the same
time? I have shown over and over again that A, B, C, D have been
manufactured from T. In ancient times, the speakers of A, B, C, D
were also the speakers of the dialects of T because the members of A,
B, C, D were also in the so-called "Pagan" religion, that is, the
ancient Turanian Sky-God OGUZ religion and/or TUR religion. However,
the members of A, B, C, D were not ethnically TUR/TURK peoples.

The ancient understanding of the Turanian concept of "GOD" was a
"duality" concept, by another name a "YIN-YANG" concept, which stands
for cold/hot, dark/light, evil/good respectively. In Turkish, this is
expressed as "AK HAN" (WHITE LORD) referring to "Sun and Sunlight" and
"KARA HAN" (BLACK LORD) referring to "darkness". "AK HAN" represented
goodness, knowledge, justice and tolerance to all people and things
while the Kara-Han represented the opposite of Ak-Han. There are many
linguistic evidences that the language associated with this ancient
universal religious understanding of the cosmos was Turkish.
Presently, there is the indication that English, a language that has
been manufactured from Turkish, is slowly becoming a world-wide used
language. With regards to this language, it would even be correct to
state that a language "encrypted from Turkish" is being used
throughout most of the world.

Those who were not Turanians yet were under the influence of Turanian
civilization were inclined to follow a world path of their own. Thus
they chose the Kara-Han as opposed to Ak-Han (SUN) group. This last
group when they fell apart from the Ak-Han group, had to develop
languages for themselves to make themselves different from the Ak-Han
group. One of the aspects of being a separate group is to have a
different language. The easy way to own one or more languages
different from the existing language that was being spoken world wide
at that time was to break, mix, combine, rearrange and fuse together
the words and the phrases of the existing language. That is what the
members of A, B, C, D, etc., did to come up with languages for
themselves from the much earlier model language Turkish (T).

In the process of manufacturing new words for those
to-be-made-languages, their linguists used Turkish words and phrases
and their variants as source material. Thus the newly generated words
in languages A, B, C, and D would look alike among themselves as if
they were the members of one language family. In fact they were not.
Yet with respect to the source language they would look different as I
have shown in my papers.

So you see the root problem of languages is the "religion" related
problem. In Babylon when they were usurping everything Sumer, Masar
and Turkish in terms of religion, culture and language, the cabalists were
formulating all kinds of mythology to be told to the people in
overcoming the immense problem that layed ahead of them. Languages are
made by people and are the product of culture. And they do not readily
change unless some group interferes intentionally with them for
political reasons.

This explanation that I have clearly described above should untie the
artificial knot that you postulated and asked Polat Kaya to resolve.

Best wishes to all,

Polat Kaya


David L wrote:
> It seems that the situation is such that elements of language T
> (Turkish) have irregular forms (via anagrammatizing, transposing, and
> straight forward correspondences) to forms of languages A, B, C, D,
> ect... But if the comparisons between A, B, C, D are regular, and
> the correspondences to T irregular, as has been shown, then either
> all languages have derived from an unknown language which artifically
> created the new forms irregularly from T, a language derived from T,
> say T'; or not. If not then it could only be true that the reverse
> is true, which is that T' is derived from A, B, C, D, or some how
> derived from them artificially, then T is derived from T' and not T'
> from T.
> The only way the above could be false as far as I can see at the
> moment is if A, B, C, D, ect... have no regular correspondences, but
> they in fact do, and Indo European is an example subset of that set.
> We may even postulate that Sumerian and Turkish correspond to T and
> T', but not necessarily in that order.
> Mr. Polat Kaya, how are we to resolve this?
> ???
> Dave