SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkbilig / 2017 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 34

On The Origin of the Pseudo-Carian Glosses And the Hurro-Urartian Lexical Loans in Turkic

‘SÖZDE KARCA’ KELİMELERİN KÖKENİ VE TÜRKÇEDEKİ HURRİ-URARTUCA LEKSİKAL ALINTILAR ÜZERİNE

Orçun ÜNAL
Journal
Türkbilig
Pages
25–68
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It has been concluded that these may be Urartian loanwords in Turkic.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study deals with a number of glosses which appear in the Byzantinian sources, most of them in Ethnica of Stephanos Byzantinos, and are labeled as Carian.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As these glosses are not actually attested in Carian inscriptions, they are called pseudo-glosses in the relevant literature.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It has been concluded that these may be Urartian loanwords in Turkic.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The present study deals with a number of glosses which appear in the Byzantinian sources, most of them in Ethnica of Stephanos Byzantinos, and are labeled as Carian. As these glosses are not actually attested in Carian inscriptions, they are called pseudo-glosses in the relevant literature. Six of these pseudo-Carian glosses are examined and for all of them, Turkic etymologies are proposed which reach into the depth of (Pre-)Proto-Turkic. It is asserted that the glosses which surface as Carian in the works of the Byzantinian historians may have entered into Anatolia by the Cimmerians or by the Turukku which were in close contact with the Urartians and Hurrians, respectively. Therefore, thirty-seven similar lexical items in the Hurro-Urartian and Turkic vocabularies are listed. It has been concluded that these may be Urartian loanwords in Turkic. Based on these correspondences, the phonological features of Pre-Proto-Turkic are discussed. The supposition that the Cimmerian population was partly Turkic-speaking and their language was the donor of the pseudo-Carian glosses and the recipient of the Urartian loanwords proves to be the most plausible one

Özet

Bu çalışma, Stephanos Byzantinos'un Ethnika adlı eseri başta olmak üzere, Bizans kaynaklarında geçen ve 'Karca' olarak nitelendirilen bazı sözcükler üzerinde durmaktadır. Bu sözcükler, Karca yazıtlarda tanıklanmadığı için, ilgili literatürde 'sözde Karca' (pseudo-glosses) olarak adlandırılmaktadır. Çalışmamızda, altı 'sözde Karca' kelime ele alınmış ve bunlar için (Pre-)Proto-Türkçeye kadar dayanan etimolojiler önerilmiştir. Bizanslı yazarların eserlerinde Karca olarak ortaya çıkan bu sözcüklerin Urartularla temas hâlindeki Kimmerler veya Hurrilerle yakın ilişki içinde olan Turukkular aracılığıyla Anadolu'ya girmiş olabileceği öne sürülmüştür. Bu sebeple, Hurri-Urartuca ve Türkçenin söz varlıkları arasındaki toplam otuz yedi benzer kelime listelenmiş, bunların Urartucadan Türkçeye alıntılar olabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır. Bu karşılaştırmalara dayanarak, Pre-Proto-Türkçenin ses özelliklerine değinilmiştir. Kimmer nüfusunun kısmen Türkçe konuşanlardan oluştuğu ve dillerinin bir yandan 'sözde Karca' sözcüklerin kaynağı, diğer yandan Urartuca sözcüklerin alıcısı olduğu varsayımı en makul öneri olarak görülmektedir

🔖

Cite This Article

ÜNAL, O. (2017). On The Origin of the Pseudo-Carian Glosses And the Hurro-Urartian Lexical Loans in Turkic. Türkbilig, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 34, 25–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/418364

References (16)

  1. ADAMS, Douglas Q., (2013), A Dictionary of Tocharian B. Revised and Greatly Enlarged, Second Edition,
  2. Amsterdam-New York, NY: Rodopi. ADIEGO, I. J., (2007),
  3. The Carian Language, With an appendix by Koray Konuk. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One, The Near and Middle East, Volume Eighty-Six, Leiden-Boston: Brill. ATA, Aysu, (1997), Nāṣırü’d-din Bin Burhānü’d-dīn Rabġūzī, Ḳıṣaṣü’l-Enbiyā, (Peygamber Kıssaları), II. Dizin, Ankara:
  4. Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  5. AYDIN, Erhan, (2012), “Küli Çor Yazıtı ve Yazıtla İlgili Sorunlar Üzerine Notlar”, Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları, 5: 251-272.
  6. BATTAL, Aptullah, (1934), İbnü-Muhennâ Lûgati, İstanbul.
  7. BAXTER, William H. ve Laurent SAGART, (2014), Baxter-Sagart Old Chinese reconstruction, version 1.1 (20 September 2014), URL http://ocbaxtersagart.lsait.lsa.umich.edu.
  8. BAZIN, Louis, (1950), “Recherches sur les parlers T’o-pa (5e siècle après J. C.)”, T’oung-pao, 39: 228- 329. BECKWITH, Christopher I., (2004),
  9. Koguryo, The Language of Japan’s Continental Relatives, An Introduction to the Historical-Comparative Study of the Japanese-Koguryoic Languages, With a Preliminary Description of Archaic Northeastern Middle Chinese, (Brill’s Japanese Studies Library; v. 21), Leiden-Boston: Brill. BENKŐ, Loránd, (Ed.) (1993-1997), Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Ungarischen, 3 Bde., Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. BENGTSON, J. D. ve V. Blažek, (2011), “On the Burushaski–Indo-European Hypothesis by I. Čašule”, Journal of Language Relationship, 6: 25-63.
  10. BEŞEVLİYEV, V., (1992), Părvobălgarski Nadpisi, Sofiya: İzdatelstvo Na Bălgarskata Akademiya Na Naukite. BOODBERG, Peter A., (1936), “The Language of the T’o-Pa Wei”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, I, 2: 167-185.
  11. BOUZEK, Jan, (2008), “Cimmerians”, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Εύξεινος Πόντος, Çevrimiçi: http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=10779 (Son erişim tarihi: 05.01.2017).
  12. CARRUBA, O., (1965), “Review of G. Neumann, Untersuchungen zum Weiterleben hethitischen und luwischen Sprachgutes in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit, Wiesbaden, 1961”, Orientalische Literaturzeitung, 60: 554-559. CDA = BLACK, Jeremy ve Andrew GEORGE, Nicholas POSTGATE, (ed.) (2000), A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, 2nd (corrected) printing, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. CEYLAN, Emine, (1997),
  13. Çuvaşça Çok Zamanlı Ses Bilgisi, Ankara:
  14. Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  15. COENE, Frederik, (2010), The Caucasus: An Introduction, London-New York: Routledge. COLLINGE, N. E., (1985),
  16. The Laws of Indo-European, Amsterdam-Philadelphia: