From: cluster.user@yale.edu (Cluster User) Subject: Re: The Bulgars are Bulgars (Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars) Date: 12 May 1999 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <3738ca86.121904158@news.yale.edu> References: <36ca073a.16343620@news.yale.edu> <36cca3ed.14676934@news.yale.edu> <36cca75c.15555467@news.yale.edu> <36cf2980.190197920@news.yale.edu> <36dee7fa.108219411@news.yale.edu> <36e40f21.4849643@news.yale.edu> <7c6hs4$va@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36f6aeef.439178515@news.yale.edu> <7dajnt$ssk$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7ei51h$4m5$1@news.ox.ac.uk> <370cf95d.8677457@news.yale.edu> <7en884$1t8@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3712427B.DA4346AA@mbay.net> <3713a994.660219@news.yale.edu> <371BFCD7.98263C22@montclair.edu> <372220bb.143446995@news.yale.edu> <37226EDB.7038A129@montclair.edu> <7fuohl$ori@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <372f5c62.91986990@news.yale.edu> <372f5cbe.92079743@news.yale.edu> <7gp50a$cct@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3734b8cd.146733852@news.yale.edu> <3736019e.9033128@news.yale.edu> <7h8v0l$fmg@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> Organization: Yale University Newsgroups: sci.lang On 11 May 1999 09:58:45 GMT e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk (Vassil Karloukovski) wrote: > >In article <3736019e.9033128@news.yale.edu>, cluster.user@yale.edu says... > >... >>>BTW, about this "alem" (first) you had some doubts. Dobrev has: "The >> >>in common turkic "il" is attested (codex comanicus), and its >>derivatives. what is disputed by clauson is "al" meaning "front" >>in addition to this. >> >>>"pamirian" "alem" (alam, olam) and "tvirem" (tijorem, tiram, diverem) >>>denoted the beginning and the end of the harvest, correspondingly. Z. >>>Lenz in "Zeitrechnung im Nuristan. Berlin, 1938, had that the >>>"pamirians" (I wonder whether he means the nuristani) celebrated the >>>New year twice - as "Nauruz-i-olam" (initial New Year) and, the >> >>I don't know what is meant by these words. if it really means "first" >>it is not common in iranian. it could be a combined arabic - iranian >>awwal-am as in talysh > > >OK, but the nuristanis (Kafiristan) were pagans until quite recently. Z. yes. and kafiristan means "land of the heathens". apparently nuristan (land of light") was coined after their conquest and conversion. >Lenz was probably careful enough to distinguish between traditional nevertheless his motives were anthropological rather than linguistic and a certain amount of arabic may have entered through perisan and pashto. "nauruz" is new persian, although the native word might be similar. >calendar terms and 20th century arabic loans. > it could even be *th*la:m "work" (in one of the languages of the region), if it is connected with the harvest, and dobrev mistook theta for "o". I'll have to look into this later, kati seems to be the name of the most common language there. > >Here is what Dobrev has for the ordinals in the nominalia as well as >the quite differing turkic interpretation: > > >bulgar modern pamirian, saka khotanese, sanscrit, turkic > etc. sogdian avestan reading > >ALEM, ALAM, OLAM (beg. *AL (main) ALAM (first, il, ilk, ilki >first of the year [SIja, p.266] high, main) (one) <-- V.K.: isn't > ALEJN (first) [SCR, p.29] "bir the common turkic? > ?[TRS, p.11]? > AL (first) > [Mun, p.188] also elem chuvash a~le~x before, NB turkish evvel (`ar. first) for "before") or u"lem ("future", like turkish ileri il + eri, also "forwards, ahead") codex comanicus has "ilyas ay" < *il yaz ay (first month of spring, for "march") ilk has frequently a temporal meaning. clauson has: <<'first' in order of time and space.>> "birinc,i" (tu"rku"t, chuvash pe~rreme~$) is more general. "il" does not mean "one". talysh has evvelminci (! arabic + iranian and turkic suffixes) turkish "alIn" (forehead) was also attributed to talysh by dobrev, although not listed in his dictionary. these words are not found in the dictionaries. al, ala:n seems to be a noun of place. sanskrit alam is given as "enough", "equal to ", "high" I don't find shown to be found for iranian. > >TUTOM, THUW (two), DUWTAN DUV (two) *DUVITYA to":rt >second (a pair) [SIja, p.266] [SIJa, p.201 (four)!! > [Jazg, p.79] > DUVVOM (second) > [RPDS, p.134] > text: toutom yakut tu"o"rt volga twe:tim (fourth) chuv. ta~vatame~$ note the old diphthongal long vowel (yakut, volga, chuvash) in the bulghar text. old persian (not the same as "avestan") did have duviti:ya. nevertheless most iranian languages have the suffixless form /du/ NB french du, eng. two. >CHITEM, SIT (three) CIT (three) ye.tti, ye.ti >third [SIJa, p.79] [SIJa, p.201] (seven)!! > C^I (three) CITYA (thrid) > [Jazg, p.53] > jazg. CHIJEM (third) > ishk. SEJEM (third) > volga cye:tim chuv. se~c,c,e~me~$ again old persian th(r)it:ya- and avestan thritya- the short form without the -t seems to be more common in persian -t became -h. NB eng. "three" >TVIREM, TFAR (four) TEUR (four) TUIRYA (fourth) toquz >fourth [SIJa, p.450] [SIJa, p.266] [B, p.246] (nine)!! > C^FIR (four) > [Mun, p.456] > CFJUREM (fourth) > [Ishk, p.51] > volga *tIHIrIm, tIxIrIm *toqIr > tog~Ir > twIr, tvIr etc. would be believable for the chuvash group or turkic languages of eastern europe. H (without a dot) may be an error for x (with a dot) in arabic script, or x may have lost some friction. old iranian *c,atwar- avesta tuirya-, a:xtu:iri:m "fourth soghdian c,atVar only yaghnobi (related to soghdian) has tifa:r forms with c,- are more common sanskrit as both c,- and t- forms, c, forms being more common. >VECHEM, PENJ (five) PENJ, PATSI (five) u":c >fifth [Jazg, p.193] PAMJEM (fifth) (three)!! > talish W@JZH [SIJa, p.266] > (five fingers) PNCM (=panchem) (fifth) - > PINDZEM (fifth) sogdian buddhist > [RPDS, p.594] > jazg. PENCHEM (fifth) > turkic u":c, volga vec,im (vec,) cuv. vis's'e~me~$ (vis', vis'e~, vis's'e~) pin*dz*@m is pashto. this was considered problematic by the iranist we consulted. a consistent p- has become v- (though osset has fon*dz*) and the nasal (-n-) has been lost >SHEHTEM, S^AD (six) X^SEI (six) SAT (six) sekkiz, sekiz >sixth SHPAKHEM, SHASHOM [SIJa, p.266] [B, p.246] (eight)!! > [RPDS, p.745] > volga sekirim in danube the-tim suffix is used; -r + t gets elided as in toutum < *to":rtem and as the -l- in bexti the last one is persian, the other pashto. the pashto form is $paj.@m, (j. = retroflex *zh*) becomes like *gh* in pakhtu dialect (his dictionary uses this form as basis of transcription into cyrillic). edelman gives *$a$th- avesta x$tva- I have trouble explaining the -x- in bulghar using iranian as a basis, only pakhtu dialect has anything similar, and this seems to be recent. again, most recent forms don't have the -t. >ALTEM ALTH (back) ARTHA (ending), alti >twelfth, [Jazg, p.10] ARDHA (twelve) (six) >last balkar ART (last month) [SCR, p.28] > > "alt" is "under, the underneeth" in turkic "art" is "behind, the back" in turkic, evidently used as "last" in balkar. balkar is a turkic (qypchaq) language of the caucasus, believed to have had connections to the bulghars. jazg. has al(h)ad as a vulgar word for "grave". (perhaps arabic al-Hadd "the limit") and alka as a variant arqa "behind", clearly a loan from turkic. sanskrit ardha is "half" or "side", "part" I don't find shown to be found for iranian. some changes for volga since my last post are due to interpreting the arabic script. turkic languages have forms with undoubled and doubled consonants. chuvash uses both in diferent contexts. the turkic interpretation has a phonetic consistency: it correlates well with volgabulghar, i.e. the turkic nation calling itself bulghar, and the postulated sound changes are consistent with the chuavsh group. the iranian interpretation in my veiw fails to account well for at least two of them and no mention is made of "bexti". > >>>Dobrev also cites some sumero-accadian "alejn" (first, initial), >>>assyro-babylonian "ejlul" (ejl-ul, first month), and for "tiramokh, >> >>it's the first month of the jewish year. eyl or something similar >>may be thought of for semitic "first," arabic 'awwal > > >what about the sumerian "ellimu" (first) or "tamtamma" (four (people?))? chalk it off to nostratic studies. >What is the origin of these iranian ordinal suffixes -m, etc. and the >similar to them danube bulgar -em, -om ("vechem", "tutom") and volga >bulgar/chuvash -im, -em ("veshim, "pilem")? As you said the common turkic >ordinal suffix is quite different - -inchi. Dobrev mentions that L. perhaps not that different, see below. >Benzing (1959) already proposed that "the bulgar suffixes are from the that's certainly a possiblity that I had mentioned. it seems to be difficult to find the origin of them. >persian -um" but there is some confusion because later he introduces >some paleoasiatic and samojed ordinal suffixes -imdi, -emesh and says in turkic -nti (rare). this may be represented in danubebulghar by -ti (for 5) and tum (for 8). >that "the chuvash ordinal suffix -mesh is identical with the paleoasiatic >-mesh used by the Enisey ostjaks to form ordinals". Also he found some -$ is generally a foreign sound in chuvash, but s' isn't and may represent turkic c, . the turkic sufixes may be compound and -n > -m is found for the chuvash group. volga has -m, -nc, , inc,i, -n$ and -n$i and one case of -$. so they may be explained either within turkic or as a loan from somewhere. tu"rku"t had first -nc, which later became -nc,i >basque "elen" (first month), "hiren" (third month). > > >BTW, going back to the bulgar "shegor" (bull, the year of the bull) and the >various pamirian, caucasian (sheg, ceg), sanscrit (s,ikvara), turkic (sIg~Ir) turkic also has the alternative sag~Ir, seemingly connected sag~= "to milk" (for some reason sinor finds difficulty incorporating the bulghar word with this etymology). s'ikvara is not the usual term for "bull" in sanscrit, more of an appellation from "strong". the others may be loans. sinor doesn't find a connection of sIg~Ir with IE. perhaps I-i-e changed places with o-a in bulghar (chuvash xIra~m, turkic qarIn). sIg~Ir in turkic is the more general word for a bovine (roughly like "cattle" in turkish sIg~Ir eti is "beef" (et = meat), i.e. without regard to sex. ibn muhanna (13th -14th cent.) and abulghazi (1663) have this word listed as the calender term. >paralles. Dobrev also has: the proto-indian "siir" (the year of the ox), >sumerian "sikka" (horned cattle in general), modern iranian (Zekhre dialect) >"shegor" (wild bull), basque "shegor" (1-year old calf). > these are interesting, but relevant to nostratic, proto-world studies. > >Regards, > Vassil K. > > >============= >TRS - TalIshko-russkij slovar', M., 1976 >RPDS - Russko-pushtu-dari slovar', M., 1983 >SIJa - Sredne-iranskie jazIki, M., 1981 >SCR - A.McDonell, Sanscrit dictionary. Oxford, 1976 >B - T. Barrou, Sanskrit, M., 1971 >Mun - A. Grunberg, Mundzhanskij jaZik, M., 1980 >Jazg - D. Edel'man, Jazguljamsko-rus. slovar', M., 1971 >Ishk - T .Pahalina, Ishkashimskij jazIk, M., 1959 >Benzing, L. Die Hunnish, Donaubulgarische and Volgabulgarische - > In: Philogiae Turcica Fundamenta. Wiesbaden, 1959. > > >