|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 7, 2012 13:40:53 GMT 3
I don't believe and support his theories. I find it perfectly reasonable for Turks to name their countries in their own language. It's advanced enough in my opinion and they don't need foreign languages for basic things like naming their homes! It's not something to believe or not. It something to think over.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 9, 2012 11:36:09 GMT 3
Such simplifications are hazardous ways of thinking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2012 23:32:32 GMT 3
"in Azerbaijan the Mugan valley is called Dashti-Mugan, which means that some time ago the Mugan steppe was famous for rich pastures. Today similar deserts can be found in different regions of the Middle East – in Afghanistan (Dashti-Margo), Iran (Deshte-Kevir, Deshte-Lut), Pakistan (Deshtestan) – sometime they were bloomy oases, and the Turkic speech prevailed there. It hasn’t been forgotten until now." "However Desht-I-Kipchak is not the same" Mughan steppe of Azerbaijan is not a desert, it's filled with pastures and I don't think it's similiar to these desert areas mentioned. You can see the landscape of Mughan steppe in this photo.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 11, 2012 11:52:07 GMT 3
Well Dasht in Persian is used both for deserts and for plains and steppes.
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 11, 2012 14:52:52 GMT 3
Maybe the word is related with Turkish "düz" meaning "plains". (if it's not related with taþ meaning stone or overflow)
I still find it extremely wrong to think of words in other languages when very similar words exits in Turkic. We first have to look at Turkic languages when we are trying to determine the etymology. That's how it must be done.
After all we are talking about people mostly speaking Turkic. Why would they name their country in a language they know nothing about? Are their language not advanced enough to name their country?
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 11, 2012 22:37:48 GMT 3
Ancalimon, If languages can borrow words for body parts from other languages, why can't they borrow names of countries? Surely Hungarians did not have physical defects such as missing knees, arms, and stomachs before they borrowed these words from Turkic!
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 12, 2012 2:18:12 GMT 3
Ancalimon, If languages can borrow words for body parts from other languages, why can't they borrow names of countries? Surely Hungarians did not have physical defects such as missing knees, arms, and stomachs before they borrowed these words from Turkic! That was because they had a very large Turkic population. Did the Kýpchaks had a large Persian population? Persians couldn't have adapted to their way of life. Also what do you think about this: tt.baskent.edu.tr/turkmitolojisi/oguz.htmÝdil adlý bu ýrmak, çok çok büyük bir suydu, Oðuz baktý bir suya, bir de beylere sordu: "- Bu Ýdil sularýný, nasýl geçeceðiz, biz?" Orduda bir bey vardý, Oðuz Han'a çöktü diz. Uluð-Ordu-Beð derler, çok akýllý bir erdi, Bu yönde Oðuz Han'a yerince akýl verdi. Baktý ki yerde bu beð, çok aðaç var çok da dal, Kesti biçti dallarý, kendine yaptý bir Sal. Aðaç sala yatarak, geçti Ýdil nehrini, Çok sevindi Oðuz-Han, buyurdu þu emrini: "- Kalýver sen burada, halkýna oluver bey! "Ben dedim öyle olsun, densin sana Kýpçak-Beð!" There was a lord among the horde. They were trying to pass the Ýdil River. That lord build a raft from the woods and passed the river. Oghuz Khan said. Your name shall be Lord Kýpchak. You are to be the lord of these people.
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 12, 2012 7:21:29 GMT 3
That was because they had a very large Turkic population. They did not. Like many borrowed words, they came as a result of new technology or culture. In this case, some new animal husbandry techniques learned from Turkic tribes included words for animal body parts. Later these words came to be used for human body parts too. Administrative and political terms also tend to be heavily borrowed from other languages and I'd not be surprised if that's the case with desht. There is a large number of examples. Consider the terms vali and vilayet. Would you attribute that to a very large Arab population? Or perhaps the Ottomans used those words because Anatolia was originally Arab? Best case scenario: they borrowed administrative technologies from the Arabs.
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 12, 2012 19:42:13 GMT 3
That was because they had a very large Turkic population. They did not. Like many borrowed words, they came as a result of new technology or culture. In this case, some new animal husbandry techniques learned from Turkic tribes included words for animal body parts. Later these words came to be used for human body parts too. Administrative and political terms also tend to be heavily borrowed from other languages and I'd not be surprised if that's the case with desht. There is a large number of examples. Consider the terms vali and vilayet. Would you attribute that to a very large Arab population? Or perhaps the Ottomans used those words because Anatolia was originally Arab? Best case scenario: they borrowed administrative technologies from the Arabs. www.karam.org.tr/Makaleler/520771897_eker.pdfAccording to Prof. Dr. Arpad Berta, Megyer is Finno-Ugric in origin while the other 6 major tribes (Gyarmat, Tarjan, Kürt, Jenö, Ker, Keszi) that formed the Hungarians have Turkic etymologies. This is worth talking about in that case. Also doesn't Hungar come from On Ogur?
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Mar 12, 2012 19:58:01 GMT 3
I think Ihsan said it best: "Such simplifications are hazardous ways of thinking." Did you know the word America has an Italian etymology. Are we Italian?
You're taking hypothetical and controversial etymologies for tribal names and saying that it proves there was a large Turkic population. Hazardous way of thinking...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2012 20:08:10 GMT 3
Well Dasht in Persian is used both for deserts and for plains and steppes. "Dasht" are not used by us, when we refer to Mughan we say "Muğan Düzü".
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 12, 2012 22:36:45 GMT 3
I think Ihsan said it best: "Such simplifications are hazardous ways of thinking." Did you know the word America has an Italian etymology. Are we Italian? You're taking hypothetical and controversial etymologies for tribal names and saying that it proves there was a large Turkic population. Hazardous way of thinking... There are theories that the name is originally used by American Indians. I don't know. Maybe you are right and the name was a Persian one. After all, there were many Persian names in Ottoman Empire too despite it being a Turkic country.
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Mar 13, 2012 1:15:44 GMT 3
The word combination "Dasht-i Kipchak (Dasht-e Qebčāq)" is Persian by its form. Persian language was very popular in Central Asia in the late Middle Ages (as was Sogdian before that), so it is not surprising to have Persian terms in use amongst the Steppe people from that time on.
I don't think the term "Dasht-i Kipchak" was used by the Kipchaks themselves - at least not originally. In my opinion for some reason Murad Adji is simply obsessed with the name "Kipchak" - for him all Steppe people are Kipchaks, not only all Turks but pretty much everybody else. While actually it seems more probable that "Kuman" was the original designation of the Kipchak tribes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 15:12:05 GMT 3
Kipchaks themselves used "Qıpçaq Dalası" and not "Desht-i Kipchak" obviously.
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Mar 20, 2012 23:56:55 GMT 3
|
|