|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Dec 17, 2008 9:53:45 GMT 3
According to Starostin, Xiongnu (匈奴) would be...
Old Chinese: sŋoŋ/ŋ̥oŋ nhā
Middle Chinese: xöuŋ no
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Dec 17, 2008 19:42:40 GMT 3
Ostyak as an areal term? I've never heard of that. Ostyak is supposedly a Russian corruption of the name Ishtek, an old name for the Bashkort. Using it is like Europeans calling every Turk or Mongol a "Tartar".
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Dec 17, 2008 22:03:58 GMT 3
Or Chinese calling Huns "Xiongnu", or Toghrul "Wang" or Persians calling Tengri "Aspandiat"...
... I'm seriously starting to believe all ancient sedentary historians have hearing problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 17, 2008 23:16:37 GMT 3
They had! You should ask it to me! It's me who always have to use their sources while writing something ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Dec 18, 2008 6:49:41 GMT 3
There's two issues. The first is that most historians used second-hand reports from other travelers. The other is that it was common practice by settled peoples to apply the name of an earlier adversary that lingers in their collective memory with new adversaries living in the same area. That's why when the Huns invaded Europe they were called Scythians.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 18, 2008 18:23:05 GMT 3
Well as for the pre-Hunnic Empire period of the Eastern Steppe (Mongolia), it is very hard to determine which site belongs to whom.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 29, 2010 11:19:28 GMT 3
hjernespiser,
I found this thread interesting. I'm currently reading Prof. Uchiraltu's book. He's a linguistics prof at Inner Mongolian University at Hohhot. His idea was to take the approx. 700 Xiongnu words in Chinese sources and compare them to Old Mongolian. He certainly knows his stuff. His work is only a small part of what Mongol scholars and Chinese scholars are doing to study the Huns/Xiongnu.
Also, he takes old forms of Turkic words and has found similarities with Mongol forms, especially the very old forms, some of which are apparently preserved in the Oirat dialect.
I don't think the book is on any "B.S." meter, which I think is an unfair thing to comment on a book you haven't read. The book is in fact a series of publications from the university's journal.
To answer your question on whose old Chinese work he bases his comparisons on, he uses Gong Si Liang whose book is published by Beijing University.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Apr 29, 2010 16:36:42 GMT 3
Hmm... But what is so brilliant in that discovery? Apparently, there are many similar words especially in the old forms of Mongolian and Turkic...
Many similarities between Turkic and Oirat dialect? Of course ! Oirat is the most Turkified Mongolic language...
|
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Apr 29, 2010 16:38:48 GMT 3
Ostyak as an areal term? I've never heard of that. Ostyak is supposedly a Russian corruption of the name Ishtek, an old name for the Bashkort. Using it is like Europeans calling every Turk or Mongol a "Tartar". Russians never used Ostyak to refer to Bashkirs. It's an old Russsian name for Khanty. |
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Apr 29, 2010 17:53:33 GMT 3
christopher,
The fact that something is published in a university journal doesn't automatically mean it is a quality piece. Having come across way too much B.S., I have every right to be cautious and was soliciting for opinions on it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Until there's wider and positive review of that work by more well-known experts, I'll approach it with much skepticism.
Sarmat,
What about the name Ishtek?
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 29, 2010 18:31:33 GMT 3
I guess I was expecting a higher level of dialogue. Oh well, back to square one looking for some people to discuss this with. I'll have to just stick to Eurasian Nomads, which is fine but very quiet.
I'm outta here!
|
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Apr 29, 2010 19:26:09 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Apr 29, 2010 19:30:46 GMT 3
But how about some critical review? "GYÖRGY KARA: Judgment on a Misjudgment. A Review of Uchiraltu's A hun nyelv szavai (Words in the Hsiung-nu Language). 2008. Budapest: Napkút Kiadó. Critical notes on a Hungarian version of a series of papers written by Uchiraltu of Inner Mongol University who, in an effort to interpret several Hsiung-nu terms found in Chinese sources, attempted to prove that the language of the Hsiung-nu was Mongolic. " www.folkscene.hu/magzines/csoda/tartalom_eng.htm |
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Apr 29, 2010 21:25:01 GMT 3
Sarmat, What about the name Ishtek? Do you mean "Ishtek" as a name for the people? Ishtek/Istek was used by Tatars and Kazakhs to refer to Khanty. It's most likely just a corruption of "Osyakh" which means "people of Ob" in Khanty language. However, in some of the sources, Russian researchers of the 19th century proposed an explanation of Ishtek as "rebellios," "violent." I'm not sure from which language this translation is. May be from Turkic. However, interestingly enough, Kazakhs also called Bashkirs "Sheri Ishtek" - "Red Ostyaks." Which is interesting ! My hypo is that this name might indicate Finno-Ugric origins of Bashkirs since it shows that Khanty and Bashkirs were viewed by Kazakhs as related to "Ostyaks," though Bashkirs were called not just simply Ostyaks, but "Red Ostyaks." May be that somehow corresponds to the accounts of Red haired nomades in the Ural region? I red about that somewhere, but can't say where exactly from the top of my head...  Though, truly, there are indeed some red haired people among modern Volga Tatars and Bashkirs... |
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Apr 29, 2010 22:54:29 GMT 3
|
|
Though, truly, there are indeed some red haired people among modern Volga Tatars and Bashkirs...