From: e.karloukovski@uea.ac.uk (Vassil Karloukovski) Subject: Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars Date: 02 Feb 1999 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <797lvu$jo4@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> References: <369E3BE1.5C45@sbu.ac.uk> <77li2j$qi0$1@whisper.globalserve.net> <369F52FE.2B6@sbu.ac.uk> <77rc86$auj$1@brokaw.wa.com> <36A444B3.F3B70F1C@alum.mit.edu.-> <7827sb$269$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36A52D70.9E372DD2@alum.mit.edu.-> <36A556AB.9927BD29@montclair.edu> <36a63533.58309714@news.yale.edu> <7866ud$i9m$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36cdb21e.883120019@news.wxs.nl> <36A7FCC8.79790A6B@earthlink.net> <36d77e23.1000882888@news.wxs.nl> <36A95129.AF5336A1@earthlink.net> <78ppdl$84o@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b0d7ec.2343569@news.yale.edu> <78v145$vl6@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b62cc5.29538494@news.yale.edu> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII Organization: University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang In article <36b62cc5.29538494@news.yale.edu>, cluster.user@yale.edu says... ... >whatever the final evaluation of dobryev's work is, turkic was used as >a model for the reasons I summarized in part, and it was not just >pulled out of the hat. I also think that dobryev is making errors in >neglecting or denying -r turkic etymologies. In fact he is accepting the existence of some central asian (altaic, ugro- finnic) component in the proto-bulgars that reached the danube as evident by the cyclic calendar terms somor (mouse), eth (dog), dilom (snake), and toh (cock). > I have avoided getting >into this since I have not seen a published criticism of his work. Regards, Vassil K.