On fertility, old Kurds, and sheep
hart at POLBOX.COM
Tue Nov 10 23:43:45 UTC 1998
At 02:09 10.11.98 -0500, Mark Hubey wrote:
>I don't know if you read the two long posts in which you could see
>(1) a short list/example of Sumero-Turkic cognates and (2) a shorter
>list of Etruscan-Turk parallels. Much of whatever you need can be
>found from that point on.
I read the long post on Sumero-Turkic cognates some time ago and have
re-read it again. The Etruscan-Sumerian kind of lost itself in cyber-space.
I'd be grateful if you sent it to me again.
>If Turan is Etruscan (and/or if Etruscan may be related to Sumerian,
>or proto-Euphratic) then we have a reasonable grounds for looking for
>roots of Turan in proto-Euphratic (and thus Turkic) or in Sumerian.
I have no problem with this statement.
If it were formulated so in earlier exchanges, I am certain no one would
have protested: you would have had reasonable objections. Sometimes strong
word (like <<false>>) or the use of Indicative, where Subjunctive is really
meant, instead of helping communication might effectively block it.
>I merely pointed out that 'tu' or 'tuw' is the root in Turkic having
>to do with 'birth', and 'begetting'. Almost miraculously, 'tuwurghan'
>or 'tuurghan' really does mean 'she that gives birth'. Now it could be
>that 'tu' might be related to a long set of words having to do with
>sex, penis, pointed objects, etc. But after 5,000 years anything can
>happen to a language. If we had a dictionary of Etruscan, Sumerian
>and Turkic from 3,000 BC until now, say, every 100 years, we would
>not have any problems, but since we don't have it we have only partial
>data to go on.
It may be of interest to you (and to the other list members), that Dr. Jan
Braun, Professor Emeritus from the Ancient East Studies Deptt, University
of Warsaw, has been working since some time on a comparison of Sumerian and
Old (VII-VIII C AD) Tibetan. He has already identified over 300 common
lexemes. His list covers basic vocabulary, mostly verbs and it looks like
it's going to grow. His first publication on the topic is in Polish; but he
plans publishing his work in a book form in near future, and that is going
to be in English. If there is anyone interested in his present work (or
earlier - on the genetic relationship of Elamitic and Dravidian), I could
post Prof. Braun's address (he doesn't use e-mail).
>> And: pardon me, that aside with sheep was not at all funny, especially
>> considering that it also was entirely without value as an argument or
>I thought at the time it was quite appropriate since from my point of
>view the original post did not sound much like anything except heckling
>from an ignorant high-school dropout street bum. There are PhDs and maybe
physicists >here (and probably) many engineers and computer scientistsand I
can assure you that >most of them understand quite well what distance,
space, metric space, probability >theory, diffusion equation, etc mean.
Under the circumstances some ignorant laut >making fun of a serious (and
obviously something to him totally incomprehensible) >concept/idea deserves
an appropriate (equal and opposite) remark.
No - my feeling is it wasn't approppriate at all.
Dominique Thillaud protested when you said <<Turan is the Etruscan goddess
of fertility>>. Within her discipline the lines dividing virgin-, nymph-
and wife-goddesses are anchored in anthropological classificatory systems -
and these should be approached with as much care and respect as any other
system existing in the framework of human culture.
If someone mixed up in your presence the concepts of (e.g. compound, total
and conditional) probability, you would surely try to straighten things up,
which would be tantamount to defending the form of your discipline. I
believe Dominique's insistence on defending hers was as much justified.
I admire her for having the courage to start writing in English.
>Anyone is free to disagree. How you disagree does matter.
More information about the INDOLOGY