In Russian
Contents Türkic languages
Ogur and Oguz
Türkic languages
Türkic and European Genetic distance
Classification of Türkic languages
Indo-European, Dravidian, and Rigveda
Türkic, Slavic and Iranian
Türkic in English
Türkic in Romance
Alans in Pyrenees
Türkic in Greek
Türkic in Slavic
Alan Dateline
Avar Dateline
Besenyo Dateline
Bulgar Dateline
Huns Dateline
Karluk Dateline
Khazar Dateline
Kimak Dateline
Kipchak Dateline
Kyrgyz Dateline
Sabir Dateline
Seyanto Dateline


Türkic and Sumerian

Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian (EDH)
Mikes International The Hague, Holland 2007
© Copyright Mikes International 2001-2007, Alfréd Tóth 2007
Kiadó 'Stichting MIKES INTERNATIONAL' alapítvány, Hága, Hollandia.

 Posting Preface

The following citations from the work of A.Toth address the Türkic component of the subject that far exceeds the horizon of any individual agglutinative language in the Eurasia. Among the highlights of the study, is that the Hungarian and Turkish (not Türkic!) share about 55% of the 557-word list created to inventory the Sumerian-Hungarian cognates. A second look at the same list, taken for this posting, came up with a number of 53%, well within the expected accuracy assumed to be in the range of 20-30%. The extent of the Hungarian-Turkish shared vocabulary is somewhat shocking for a language widely proclaimed to be Finno-Ugrian and Uralic, but that was long advocated by dissident linguists who became retrospective dissidents after the mainstream veered toward the Finno-Ugrian paradigm, and should be expected because of the thorough ignored millennium-long attested symbiosis between the Magyar and Türkic people. The posting highlights numerous (181 out of 577, or 31%) instances where phonetical or semantical discrepancies would not support the drawn conclusions, but an effect of corrected comparisons nearly fully compensates for the initial omissions.

It is hard to miss that the Türkic-Sumerian cognates tend to use hard consonants (eg. g) instead of soft consonants (eg. k), semi-consonants (eg. j, y), or silent consonants (eg. ğ), more typical for the eastern Oguzic pronunciation; the western Oguric pronunciation is closer to the Sumeric forms, and reading the attested Oguzic forms with an Oguric spelling (i.e. reading Oguzic forms in djoking dialect instead of chhoking dialect) makes the connection more apparent. This observation closely parallels the old observation that the ancient Germanic languages tended to add a prosthetic h in front of the words starting with vowels (i.e. Elga > Helga). In the Oguz languages the trend is opposite, a prosthetic vowel is added in front of the words starting with consonants (i.e. Smirna > Izmir).

The posting's notes and explanations, added to the text of the author and not noted specially, are highlighted in blue font, shown in (blue italics) in parentheses and in blue boxes. Page numbers are shown at the end of the page in blue. Some undefined spelling, essential for phonetic comparison, was complemented with conventional English phonetic depiction.

 By Publisher

Számlaszám: Postbank rek.nr. 7528240 Cégbejegyzés: Stichtingenregister: S 41158447 Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken Den Haag Terjesztés A könyv a következ Internet-címr l tölthet le: http://www.federatio.org/mikes_bibl.html Aki az email-levelezési listánkon kíván szerepelni, a következ címen iratkozhat fel: mikes_int-subscribe@yahoogroups.com A kiadó nem rendelkezik anyagi forrásokkal. Többek áldozatos munkájából és adományaiból tartja fenn magát.

Adományokat szívesen fogadunk. Cím A szerkeszt ség, illetve a kiadó elérhet a következ címeken: Email: mikes_int@federatio.org Levelezési cím: P.O. Box 10249, 2501 HE, Den Haag, Hollandia

Publisher Foundation 'Stichting MIKES INTERNATIONAL', established in The Hague, Holland.

Account: Postbank rek.nr. 7528240 Registered: Stichtingenregister: S 41158447 Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken Den Haag Distribution The book can be downloaded from the following Internet-address: http://www.federatio.org/mikes_bibl.html If you wish to subscribe to the email mailing list, you can do it by sending an email to the following address:
mikes_int-subscribe@yahoogroups.com. The publisher has no financial sources. It is supported by many in the form of voluntary work and gifts. We kindly appreciate your gifts.

Address The Editors and the Publisher can be contacted at the following addresses:

Email: mikes_int@federatio.org
Postal address: P.O. Box 10249, 2501 HE, Den Haag, Holland
ISSN 1570-0070 ISBN-13: 978-90-8501-120-0 NUR 616


Mikes International is pleased to publish this Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian electronically written by Professor Alfred Toth, thus making it available to everyone in the world. This is the first edition of the author’s life-work, on which he worked 17 years.
The Hague (Holland), January 22, 2007


Publisher’s preface III
1. Foreword 1
2. Introduction into Sumerian-Hungarian research 4
3. Is there a Finno-Ugric or Uralic language family? 14
4. Comparing Hungarian etymologies from standard etymological dictionaries 35
5. Sumerian and Hungarian 40
6. Hungarian and the other Finno-Ugric languages 157
7. Caucasian and Hungarian 223
8. Bantu and Hungarian 238
9. Etruscan and Hungarian 254
10. Tibeto-Burman and Hungarian 296
11. Munda languages and Hungarian 336
12. Dravidian languages and Hungarian 390
13. Chinese and Hungarian 473
14. Japanese and Hungarian 567
15. Turkish and Hungarian 602
16. Austronesian and Hungarian 688
17. Mayan languages and Hungarian 713
18. Conclusions 745
19. Index of the Hungarian and other words 748
20. Index of the Sumerian words 773
  About the author 788

ALFRÉD TÓTH: Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian (EDH)

- 1 -

1. Foreword

This “Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian” – for which I propose the abbreviation “EDH” – is based on the assumption that the Hungarian (Magyar) language is the direct successor of Sumerian. With this assumption – for which the present author is convinced that there is enough evidence (cf. Chapters 2 and 3) -, EDH strongly competes with and contradicts the traditional Hungarian etymological dictionaries, that are based on the assumption that Hungarian belongs to the Finno-Ugric (FU) languages:

  • Budenz, Jozsef
    Magyar-ugor osszehasonlito szotar
    Budapest 1873-1881
    New impression with an introduction by Gyula Decsy under the title:
    A Comparative Dictionary of the Finno-Ugric Elements in the Hungarian Vocabulary Bloomington, IN 1966
  • Szarvas, Gabor
    Magyar nyelvtorteneti szotar a legregibb nyelvemlekrol a nyelvujitasig (3 vols.)
    Budapest 1890-1893
  • Gombocz, Zoltan/Melich, Janos
    Magyar etymologiai szotar (incomplete)
    Budapest 1914-1930.
  • Barczi, Geza
    Magyar szofejto szotar
    Budapest 1941
    New impression Budapest 1994
  • Benko, Lorand et al.
    A magyar nyelv torteneti-etimologiai szotara (4 vols.)
    Budapest 1967-1984
  • Lako, Gyorgy et al.
    A magyar szokeszlet finnugor elemei etimologiai szotara (3 vols.)
    Budapest 1968-1978
  • Benko, Lorand et al.
    Etymologisches Worterbuch des Ungarischen (3 vols.)
    Budapest 1993-1997
    Obviously, each 10 or 20 years, there was a need for a new (and expensive) multi-volumes etymological dictionary of Hungarian, that is very singular, since it happened in no other known language.
    - 2 -

    Furthermore, if one compares the “crucial words” – alleged borrowings from Slavonic or Turkic and words of “unknown” or “doubtful origin” -, one will find, as a rule, in each of the fore-mentioned dictionaries quite different etymologies (cf. Chapter 4).

    All these dictionaries are ordered alphabetically according to the Hungarian lemma and none of these books are written in English. EDH, however, differs in two ways from the already published etymological dictionaries of Hungarian: Firstly, it is written in English that is more widespread than Hungarian or German. Secondly, EDH is also ordered alphabetically according to the Hungarian lemma, but separately for each language or language family: Sumerian and Hungarian (Chapter 5), Hungarian and the other Finno-Ugric languages (Chapter 6), Caucasian and Hungarian (Chapter 7), Bantu and Hungarian (Chapter 8), Etruscan and Hungarian (Chapter 9), Tibeto-Burman and Hungarian (Chapter 10), Munda languages (Chapter 11), Dravidian languages and Hungarian (Chapter 12), Chinese and Hungarian (Chapter 13), Japanese and Hungarian (Chapter 14), Turkish and Hungarian (Chapter 15), Austronesian and Hungarian (16), Mayan Languages and Hungarian (Chapter 17). A chapter about conclusions (Chapter 18) and two indices (Chapters 19 and 20) conclude EDH. The fundament of all comparisons between Hungarian and Sumerian is the complete list, given in Chapter 5, from Colman-Gabriel Gostony’s “Dictionnarie d’etymologie sumerienne” (Paris 1975), a milestone for Sumerian-Hungarian research. This means: We do not take as a basis a regular Hungarian dictionary and compare all or some of its words with the words in a dictionary of another language, disregarding sound-laws and operating on kling-klang-etymologies (kling-klang is a good term, worth of further use). We set as only fact the hypothesis, that the 1042 etymologies in Gostony (1975) are correct, since they have never been disproved. In other words: We reduce the many then-thousands of Hungarian words of the following three best dictionaries:

  • Czuczor, Gergely/Fogarasi, Janos
    A magyar nyelv szotara (6 vols)
    Pest 1862-1874
    Available on CD Rom from Arcanum Adabazis Kft., Budapest (arcadat@axelero.hu)
  • Ballagi, Mor
    A magyar nyelv teljes szotara (2 vols. in 1)
    Budapest 1873
    New impression Budapest 1998
  • Halasz, ElCd/Foldes, Csaba/Uzony, Pal
    Magyar-nemet nagyszotar –Ungarisch-deutsches Grossworterbuch
    Budapest 1998

    to a relative small common Sumerian-Hungarian basis of 1042 entries and compare this list with the already mentioned languages: A word from another languages enters the list only, if it corresponds with one of the 1042 words and no other Hungarian word than one of these 1042 will be compared to another language, even if they are plenty of examples to be found in the extremely rich Sumerian-Hungarian literature (cf. Chapter 2). The only exception is Etruscan (cf. Chapter 9), being a corpus-language with an extremely restricted vocabulary. Of course, comparing three instead of two languages also reduces massively the chance of mistaken etymologies. For the sound rules I refer to Gostony (1975) concerning the Sumerian-Hungarian part and to the dictionaries of the other languages, from which we have taken our data, for the other parts, but I do not repeat the sound-rules here - neither do the FU dictionaries. Yet, almost all of the works used in EDH can be found in a big university library in America and in Europa or borrowed via interloan.
    - 3 -

    All the maps that are used in this book are copyrighted by Wikipedia.

    The author hopes that EDH will be able to establish itself as a reference work for all the peoples who have always adhered to the Sumerian-Hungarian theory or do not believe anymore in FU and Uralic linguistics. If EDH will cause some adherents of FU/Uralic linguistics to convert to Sumerian-Hungarian linguistics, then it has reached more than its author ever could hope.

    Finally, I give EDH two sad, but true quotations by two of the greatest Sumerian-Hungarian researchers on its way: Spread the word and be not surprised if you are assailed, perhaps even by people who call themselves Hungarians. (Ida Bobula, Budapest 1900 – Gaffney, SC, USA, 1981) Mert nem az az igaz, ami igaz, hanem amit a vilag igaznak – tart. (Because not that is true, what is true, but what the world – holds for true.) (Viktor Padany, Vatta (Borsod) 1906 – Melbourne, Australia 1963)

    Tucson, AZ, USA, 29.10.2006
    Alfred Toth
    - 4 -

    2. Introduction into Sumerian-Hungarian research

    1. Preliminary remarks

    Sumerian-Hungarian research has at least four drawbacks: First, there is – unlike in Finno-Ugristics and Uralistics - no complete bibliography of Sumerian-Hungarian studies, although the literature is enormous. Second, because during the communist era Sumerian-Hungarian research was forbidden in Hungary, many publications had to appear abroad in more or less ephemeral journals and obscure publishing houses. Third, the majority of these publications – again unlike FU- and Uralistic studies - are written in Hungarian, so they are not understandable for most non-Hungarians. Fourth, there are not only pearls amongst the Sumerian-Hungarian studies. Especially in linguistics, many works have been written by non-linguists, even by non-academics. Therefore, this introduction has also the purpose of leading the beginner to the scientifically valuable publications.

    2. History of Sumerian-Hungarian research

    The standard work that gives an overview of the beginnings of Sumerian-Hungarian research is:

  • Erdy, Miklos
    The Sumerian, Ural-Altaic, Magyar Relationship: A History of Research
    A sumir, ural-altaji, magyar rokonsag tortenete
    Part I : The 19th Century
    I. Resz: A 19. szazad
    New York 1974
    This work has the advantage, that it is bilingual (Hungarian and English), but the disadvantage, that
    Part II (concerning the 20th century) never appeared. A relatively short, but reliable “substitute” for
    Part II with a long bibliography is the following article:
  • Dombi, Charles (Karoly)
    The controversy on the origins and early history of the Hungarians
    In: www.hunmgyar.org/tor/controve.htm

    Here we learn the names of the decipherers of Sumerian who also connected it immediately to the “Turanian” languages (the former name of the “Ural-Altaic” family), especially Hungarian: Edward Hincks (1792-1866), Francois Lenormant (1837-1883), Jules Oppert (1825-1905) and Henry C. Rawlinson (1792-1866). The decipherment of the Cuneiform writing, in which the two basic languages of ancient Mesopotamia, Sumerian and Akkadian, were written between ca. 3000 –400 BC, was started by Georg Friedrich Grotefend as early as in 1802, but only in 1850, Rawlinson finished it.
    - 5 -

    Therefore, before 1850, there is also no Sumerian-Hungarian research. But since (as we will see in chapter 3), there are many Akkadian loanwords in Sumerian, one should never forget the following work whose aim was to prove that Hungarian is related to the Semitic languages:
    Kiss, Balint
    Magyar regisegek (Hungarian Antiquities)
    Pest 1839

    Hence, it is true, that the Finno-Ugric theory, initiated by Janos Sajnovics (1770) and Samuel Gyarmathi (1799) is older and competed with the still older theory of the Turkish origin of Hungarian, but it is mistaken to speak about the so-called “second Hungarian-Turkish war” (“ a masodik Magyar-Torok haboru”) after 1850. The connections established between the newly detected Sumerian and the Hungarian language that were most strongly propagated by two non-Hungarians, the French archeologist Lenormant and the German linguist Fritz Hommel (1854-1936), both university professors, spread quickly all over the world and found their entrance f. ex. also in some editions of the “Encyclopaedia Britannica” between 1860 and 1880.

    But things changed: Already during the so-called Bach-era 1848-1859, but at last since the Hungarian- Austrian “Ausgleich” in 1867, the Habsburgs ordered Austrian and German professors for the chairs in linguistics and history to Budapest. One of them was the German Josef Budenz who published on behalf of the Viennese court between 1873 and 1881 his “Magyar-ugor osszehasonlito szotar” (“Comparative Hungarian-Ugric Dictionary”), where the long forgotten hypothesis of Sajnovics and Gyarmathi was freshened up again. It is obvious, what the Habsburgs wanted to show: The Hungarians, who were not more than slaves in the eyes of the Habsburgs, were not allowed to trace their origins back to the Sumerians, the first high culture that existed on earth. Rather, a connection with the Lapps, the Voguls and the Ostyaks, who lived in the 19th century still in the stone-Age, was established. Political propaganda and banishment of the adherents of the Sumerian-Hungarian theory helped a lot. After the downfall of the Austrian-Hungarian double-monarchy in 1918, the communists took over Hungary already in 1919 under the leadership of Bela Kun, then extensively in 1945 and from 1956-1989, so that the communists directly continued the Anti-Sumerian-Hungarian campaign started by their enemies, the Habsburgs, since in the end, both the Habsburgs and the communists agreed in their opinion that the Hungarians are subhuman creatures.

    Nowadays, Finno-Ugristics is fully established, all Sumerian-Hungarian research is considered to be “unscientific”, representatives of this theory are blacklisted, publishing in Hungary is possible, but still difficult, because the communists are still sitting on key positions in all sectors of education (and elsewhere). Yet, there is hope, since the chairs of the FU representatives started to shake already a couple of years ago. The Tartu school of Uralistics has given up since a long time the concept of the Uralic tree-model and thus the genetic relationship of the Uralic languages:

  • Kunnap, Ago
    Breakthrough in Present-Day Uralistics
    Tartu 1998

    Angela Marcantonio has proven, that there is no FU language family either:
    - 6 -

  • Marcantonio, Angela
    The Uralic language Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics
    Oxford 2002
    Laszlo Maracz, like the two fore-mentioned scholars a university professor, has shown both in Hungarian and in English, that in reality not the Sumerian-Hungarian, but the FU theory is unscientific:
  • Maracz, Laszlo
    A finnugor elmelet tarthatatlansaga nyelveszeti szempontbol (Original of the following English translation) In: www.kitalaltkozepkor.hu/maracz_finnugor.html
  • Maracz, Laszlo
    The untenability of the Finno-Ugrian theory from a linguistic point of view In: www.acronet.net/~magyar/english/1997-3/JRNL97B.htm
    Maracz has shown, that the FU theory is circular and thus unscientific: One proves, what one already presupposes to have been proven. E.g. one compares only languages of the Finno-Ugric family in order to “prove” that these languages belong to the Finno-Ugric family. Otherwise, no Finno-Ugrist could refuse comparisons of Hungarian with Sumerian, Turkish, Japanese, etc. When the mathematician Bertrand Russell proved Gottlob Frege in the end of the 19th century, that in his logic there is circularity – the so-called Russell-paradox of a set of sets that either contains or does not contain itself -, then this result had devastating consequences for mathematics, since mathematics was based since Cantor on logic. Russell’s paradox thus did not only split set theory in two different set theories, but changed the very fundament of mathematics (cf. e.g. the Bourbaki School). But nothing like that happened until now in Finno-Ugristics. Even if circularity can be shown to a kindergarten child –for example with Epimenides’ paradox: “I am lying” -, the vast majority of Finno-Ugrists do not show any understanding.

    Maracz showed also a real alternative to comparative historical reconstruction: the so-called “wordbushes” or “clusters”: One puts together words with identical or similar form and content and orders them into bushes. This pure synchronic procedure is non-circular, because in an agglutinative language like Hungarian there are no such phenomena like ablaut that involve previous diachronic knowledge in synchronic analysis. One should not forget, either, that the method of historical reconstruction was adopted from the Indo-European languages and successfully applied to the Semitic languages - because both of them have ablaut, but it has not proven to be valuable for any other language family. Moreover, in isolating languages like Chinese and the almost whole range of Austronesian languages between Madagascar in the West and Easter Island in the East, one has no other possibility to decide, if two or more words are genetically related or not, since in these languages we have to deal with monosyllabic roots (and not to speak about the total absence of older texts in most of the latter languages). Here, too, Maracz’s method applies: If a certain word is a member of a word-bush, then all the words, that belong to this bush are genetically related to one another, but if it stays alone, then it must be a borrowing. These bushes can be taken easily from the huge Hungarian dictionary by Czuczor and Fogarasi:
    - 7 -

  • Czuczor, Gergely/Fogarasi, Janos
    A magyar nyelv szotara (The Dicitonary of the Hungarian Language). 6 vols.
    Pest 1862-74
    Available since 2003 on CD at Arcanum Adatbazis Budapest

    3. How Hungarian history looks like from the Sumerian-Hungarian point of view

    The best and most exhaustive work on general Hungarian history (including linguistics, too) is:

  • Gotz, Laszlo
    Keleten kel a nap (The Sun Rises in the East). 2 vols.
    Budapest 1994
    Original typewriter copy in 4 vols.: Altotting and Vienna 1981-84
    An extremely well written and compact introduction into all aspects of Sumerian-Hungarian history (including linguistics, folklore and anthropology) gives:
  • Bobula, Ida
    Origin of the Hungarian Nation
    Gainesville, FL 1966
    This little book, that has only 68 pages (and for which one has to pay astronomical prices in antique book stores) is an abridged version of one of the three of the author’s more extensive PhD Dissertations:
  • Bobula, Ida
    Sumerian Affiliations
    Washington, D.C. 1951,
    but unfortunately, this book has never been printed but only distributed in photocopies. (The Louis Szathmary collection of the University of Chicago, who has the best collection of Sumerian-Hungarian studies throughout the US, has a copy, that can be borrowed.) But this book was revised and translated in Spanish:
  • Bobula, Ida
    Herencia de Sumeria
    Mexico City 1967
    and gives also many valuable maps about the early wanderings of the Sumerians into the Carpathian basin.

    Amongst the other books of the same author, the following posthumous collection of minor writings is important:

  • Bobula, Ida
    A sumer-magyar rokonsag (The Sumerian-Hungarian Relationship)
    Buenos Aires 1982.

    Of special value is the following truthfully monumental work:

  • Padanyi, Viktor
    Buenos Aires 1963, new impressions Veszprem 1989, Budapest 2000 and others

    The best overview of Hungarian’s whole history from the beginnings to our time in a very broad scientific and political context gives

  • Maracz, Laszlo
    Hungarian Revival. Political Reflexions on Central Europe
    Nieuwegein (Netherlands) 1996;
    The Hague (Netherlands) 2007, Mikes International (http://www.federatio.org/mikes_bibl.html)

    Besides the already cited linguistic works of the same author, the only reliable linguistic studies are:

  • Csoke, Sandor
    Szumir-magyar egyeztetC szotar (Sumerian-Hungarian Comparative Dictionary)
    Buenos Aires s.a.
  • Csoke, Sandor
    A sumer CsnyelvrCl a magyar elCnyelvig (From the Sumerian Primeval Languages to the
    Hungarian Living Language)
    New York 1969
  • Csoke, Sandor
    Sumer-magyar osszehasonlito nyelvtan (Sumerian-Hungarian Comparative Grammar)
    Buenos Aires 1972
  • Csoke, Sandor
    Sumer-finn-mongol-torok osszehasonlito nyelvtan. 2 vols. (Sumerian-Finnic-Mongolian-
    Turkish Comparative Grammar)
    Buenos Aires 1974
  • Csoke, Sandor
    Harom tanulmany (Three Studies)
    1. Finnugor nyelvek nincsenek (There are no finno-Ugric languages)
    2. As oszlav nyelv sumer-uralaltaji elemei (The Sumerian-Ural-Altaic elements of the primeval Slavonic language)
    3. A magyar nyelv allitolagos szlav jovevenyszavai (The alleged Slavonic loanwords of the Hungarian language)
    Eberstein (Austria) 1977
    - 9 -

    Especially interesting for place and proper names are the two following works:

  • Bobula, Ida
    Ketezer magyar nev sumir eredete (Ten thousand Hungarian names of Sumerian Origin)
    Montreal 1970
  • Novotny, Elemer
    A sumer es a magyar alapszokincs egyezese (Comparison of the Sumerian and the Hungarian basic vocabularies)
    Budapest 1985
    (A privately bound big collection of photocopied typewritten essays that exist only in 1 copy in the US: in the University of Chicago Library under the calling number PH2074.N686 1985.)
    To use only with care are all works by Jos Ferenc Badiny (also known as Francisco Badiny Jos and Francisco Jos Badiny).

    The best and only one written in a sort of English is:

  • Badiny, Francisco Jos
    The Sumerian Wonder. With the collaboration of M. Brady, M. von Haynal, G. Enderlin and Dr. E. Novotny
    Buenos Aires 1974

    Characteristic of all of the many books and articles by Badiny is, that he presupposes a continuity between Sumerian and Hungarian, i.e. according to him and his followers, Sumerian never died out, and today’s Hungarian is thus nothing but a late form of Sumerian. In the following, we will present an outline of the main points of Sumerian-Hungarian history from the following article by Charles Dombi. (All quotations from Dombi, whose article is not paginated, are nmarked; what is not marked, is by me, especially the passage about the Transilvanian origin of the Sumerians: Dombi assumes that the Sumerians are autochthonous in Mesopotamia and wandered from there to Transilvania):

  • Dombi, Charles (Karoly)
    Hungarian historical chronology
    In: www.hunmagyar.org/tor/mythist.htm
    The Hungarians trace their origin back to Nimrod, who lives in the Hungarian mythology as Men-Marot (pseudo-etymologically influenced by Hung. men “stallion”). He as his wife Eneth had two sons, Magor and Hunor, who became the forefathers of the Magyars (Hungarians) and the Huns.

    The standard works for Hungarian mythology are:

  • Kandra, Kabos
    Magyar mythologia (Hungarian mythology)
    Eger 1897, new impression San Francisco 1978
    - 10 -
  • Ipoly, Arnold
    Magyar mythologia. 2 vols. (Hungarian mythology)
    Pest 1854, 2nd edition Budapest 1929

    “Byzantine sources mention that the Magyars were also known as the Sabirs who originated from Northern Mesopotamia, which was referred to as Subir-ki by the Sumerians who also originated from this land. Numerous other ancient and medieval sources also refer to the Scythians, Huns, Avars and Magyars as identical people. Independently from the various political regimes which have ruled over Hungary and which have imposed the current official version of the origins and history of the Hungarians, modern scientific and scholarly research has confirmed the Sumerian-Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar ethnolinguistic relationship and continuity”.

    The following map shows the antique Mesopotamia. The Sabirs came perhaps from the Zagros Mountains:

    The standard work for the antique and medieval testimonies of the peoples mentioned is:

  • Moravcsik, Gyula
    Byzantinoturcica. 2 vols.
    (The second volume gives all the words and names that were ascribed by the antique and medieval scribes to the people mentioned.)
    Budapest 1942 and 1958
    - 11 -

    5500 BC The Proto-Sumerians wander from Transylvania, where the age of the clay tablets of Tatarlaka has been testified by C14 analysis, towards Mesopotamia, where they start the Copper Age. Since Hungary is rich in copper, the Proto-Sumerian metallurgists may have brought their technical knowledge from their homeland into Mesopotamia. These Proto-Sumerians may be considered already as Hungarians, since their writing, that is identical with early Sumerian pictographic writing found in the cultures of Uruk-Warka IV- (ca. 3500-3200 v. Chr.) and Jemdet-Nasr (ca. 3100-2900 v. Chr.), corresponds to the Szekely runes (Hung. rovasiras, literally “carve-writing”, from Hung. roni “to carve” and from here English rune, German Rune).

    The standard works to these topics are:

  • Badiny, Jos Ferenc
    Igaz tortenelmunk vezerfonala Arpadig (Manual of Our True History Until Arpad)
    Budapest 2001
  • Torma, Zsofia
    Ethnographische Analogien (Ethnographic analogies)
    Jena 1894
    Q Vlassa, Nicolae
    Chronology of the Neolithic in Transylvania, in the light of the Tartaria settlement’s stratigraphy.
    In: Dacia 7, 1963, pp. 485-495
  • Labat, Rene/Zakar, Andras
    A sumer es akkad ekjelekrCl (About the Sumerian and Akkadian Cuneiform Signs)
    Garfield, NJ 1976

    3000 BC “Sumerian colonies are established from the Atlantic Ocean through the Mediterranean and Danubian basins to India and Central Asia (Turan), and from the Caucasus to Northeast Africa. The vast belt of Eurasian grasslands stretching from the Carpathian mountains to the Altai range, bordered in the North by the Eurasian forest belt and in the South by the Caucasus and Iranian plateau, is gradually settled by Sumerians and Sumerian-related people from Mesopotamia, Transcaucasia and Iran. These Near Eastern settlers became the peoples which were later referred to as the Scythians, Huns, Avars and Magyars among others”. The Carpathian basin was reached by the Scythians in the 6th century BC, the Huns in the 5th century A.D., the Avars in the 6th century A.D. and by the Magyars in the 9th century BC

    “First appearance of nomadic Semitic tribes in Sumerian Mesopotamia. Semitic people begin to settle in increasing numbers in Mesopotamia. The Sumerian civilization exerts a dominant influence upon the development of later Semitic cultures”.
    - 12 -

    2455 BC “The Semitic Akkadians impose their hegemony upon the Sumerian city-states. Mesopotamia is devastated by wars, the population is decimated, oppressed and enslaved by the Akkadians. Many Sumerians flee to their colonies”. 1900 B.C “The Semitic Babylonians impose their hegemony upon Mesopotamia”.

    1115 BC “The Semitic Assyrians impose their hegemony over the Near East after centuries of warfare. The ensuing devastation, decimation, deportations and oppression alter the ethnic composition of the Near East, including Mesopotamia, as the Semitic element increases and the Sumerians decrease”.

    612 BC “The Sumerian-related Chaldeans, Medes and Scythians annihilate the Assyrian empire. The Scythians dominate the vast Eurasian grasslands from the Carpathian basin to the Altai during centuries”

    539 BC “After overthrowing the Median Empire, the Persians conquer Mesopotamia and the rest of the Near East”.

    256 BC “After the fall of Persia, the Parthian Empire rules over Mesopotamia, Armenia and Iran. The Turanian Parthians, custodians of the ancient Sumerian civilization, resist the Eastern expansion of the Roman Empire.

    In 226 A.D., the Persian Sassanids overthrow the Parthian Empire which experiences a revival between 272 and 326 A.D. 2nd c. A.D. “The Hun empire reaches its greatest extent from the Pacific to the Aral sea, from Siberia to the Partian Empire and China. The Huns face centuries of struggle against an increasingly offensive and encroaching Chinese imperialism and expanionism. Facing mounting pressures from China in the East, the Huns begin the expand into Europe.

    In the 4th century A.D., the Huns begin their Western military campaigns,

    In 375 A.D., the Huns defeat the Goths, setting in motion the great migration of Germanic tribes which also contributed to the collapse of the Roman Empire”.

    5th c. “The Huns continue their crushing military campaigns against the Roman Empire. The Huns expel the Romans from the Carpathian basin (Pannonia and Dacia were occupied by the Romans after they had perpetrated genocidal warfare against the indigenous inhabitants of these Carpathian regions) and the Hun empire establishes its center of power in the Carpathian-Danubian region.

    Following Atilla’s death under suspicious circumstances in 453, the Hun’s Germanic allies turn against them and the bulk of the Hunnic tribes regroups to the East of the Carpathians, leaving a rear-guard tribe in the Eastern Carpathians. This Hunnic tribe still inhabits this region today and they are the Hungarian Szekely people”.

    562 “The Avar-Huns establish their empire in Central and Eastern Europe, with the Carpathian basin as the center of power. The Avars continue their centuries-long struggle against the encroaching German and Byzantine empires”.
    - 13 -

    9th c. “Following the settlements of Jewish refugees from the Near East in the Khazar empire, the ruling dynasty of the Khazars, another Turanian people, is converted to Judaism and seeks to impose this religion upon all its subjects. This precipitates a civil war which leads to the collapse of the Khazar empire. Several rebel Khazar tribes join the Hungarian federation which was led by the Magyar tribe. At that time the Hungarians were established in their own independent state of Dentumagyaria, between the Avar and Khazar empires”.

    859-96 “After the collapse of the Khazar Empire, the Magyars and the other Hungarian tribes move West into the Etelkoz region, where the Covenant of Blood takes place. This Covenant effectively creates the Magyar (Hungarian) nation which proceeds with the reconquest of the Carpathian basin and its surrounding regions. After expelling foreign encroaching powers from the Carpathian region and uniting with their previously settled Hun-Avar ethnic kin, the Magyars establish the Hungarian state in 896 as the successor state to the Hun and Avar empires”.

    After around 3000 BC, the Akkadians started to torment the Sumerians, which led them to emigration, but only a part of them became the later Scythians, Huns, Avars, Parthians and Magyars. As will be shown in this book, a relatively big part of the Sumerians wandered not to the North, but to the South, they spread out all over Tibet, India, China, Japan, etc. and as far as to the South Sea, where they left their traces in the languages and cultures of the Oceanian people. That part of the Sumerians, however, who took the way North via Caucasus into the Carpathian basin must have met on its way one ore more aboriginal peoples, who may have joined the later Hungarians before they separated and spread out as far as to the later Finland, Estonia and Lappland: They became what is mistakenly called today the “Finno-Ugrians”, and the small common stock of cognates (cf. chapters 3 and 4) may find its explication by borrowing from the Sumerian-Hungarians.
    - 14 -

    3. Is there a Finno-Ugric or Uralic language family?

    Even in traditional Finno-Ugric or Uralic departments, the existence of a Finno-Ugric or Uralic language family has been doubted for a couple of years. But while more and more scholars are convinced, that the former Uralic language family is nothing but a Sprachbund, most Finno-Ugrists defend their position as representatives of a language family. In this chapter, using the 100 words Swadesh-list and considering 10 Finno-Ugric and 2 Samoyed languages, it will be shown that neither the one nor the other assumption is justified. The politically motivated construction of a Finno-Ugric language family in the 18th century shows such a small basis of common words that would put back Proto-Finno-Ugric or Proto-Uralic long before 10’000 BC and therefore leads itself ad absurdum. On the other side, it will be shown that the theory of the Sumerian origin of Hungarian, commonly accepted before the invention of the Finno-Ugric and Uralic language families (cf. Erdy 1974), is acceptable also from a language-statistical point.

    The 12 Uralic as well as the Sumerian and Akkadian Swadesh lists were compiled from dictionaries (cf. the bibliography, Chapter 19). Unfortunately, the Ostyak dictionary of Karjalainen (1948) and the Mordwin dictionary of Paasonen (1990-96) were not available to me, because the Library of Congress does not borrow reference works. From the living languages only the Finnic and Estonian lists could be controlled by native speakers in the spring of 2003 in the Institute of Uralistics of the University of Szombathely (Hungary).

    The Hungarian list was compiled by the present author according to his native speaker’s proficiency. Since, as it is known, the Swadesh list was and is still discussed controversely, I would like to mention here only a few recent cases, in which the list could be applied successfully, i.e. where the calculations that follow from the list are matching with the chronological data of non-statistical linguistics: Elbert (1953) for Polynesian languages; Rabin (1975) for Semitic languages, Blažk for Sumerian (including Emesal), Akkadian, Elamitic, Kassitic, Hurrian, Urartian and Hattic; Forster, Toth and Bandelt (1998) for 17 Retoromance/Ladinic dialects and recently Forster and Toth (2003) for Celtic languages.
    - 15 -

    Hungarian Sumerian Akkadian
    (Data ommitted)

    - 22 -

    Hung. Vog. Osty. Syry. Voty. Cher. Mordw. Finn. Eston. Lapp. Ngan. Selk.
    (Data ommitted)

    - 29 -

    The evaluation of the three Swadesh lists results in the following percentages:

    Hungarian = Sumerian: 91%
    Hungarian = Akkadian: 27% (2%)

    These indications that are on the first sight contradictory, have to been understood as follows:

    From the 27 words that Hungarian shares with Akkadian, 25% are to be considered either as Sumerian borrowings in Akkadian or as Akkadian borrowings in Sumerian. For 2 Hungarian words there is not (yet?) a Sumerian etymology. To say it in other words: 93% of the (Hungarian)Swadesh list has a Mesopotamian etymology – while, as one remembers, Proto-Uralic has only 24.54% and Proto-Finno-Ugrian-Uralic even only 23.33% common words.

    The extremely high percentage of 27% Akkadian-Semitic words in Hungarian goes along with an observation by Ida Bobula: „I am convinced that the Hungarian language bears the stamp of not an early, but of a very late stage of Sumerian culture. This is shown by the quantity of Semitic cultural loanwords in Hungarian; from Akkadian and Babylonian“ (Bobula 1996, p. 51; cf. also Bobula 1951, p. 11, note 3).

    Gostony, too, who did not work with the Swadesh list either, but etymologized all available Hungarian words, came to the conclusions that from the (according to his counting) 1050 words in his Sumerian etymological dictionary 923 are shared with Hungarian words, this are 87.9% (cf. also Olah 1980, p. 12). These results show firstly a pretty exact correspondence between two methodically fully different approaches and secondly their independency of the Swadesh list.

    Aside from that, Gostony has shown that Hungarian and Sumerian correspond in 51 of 53 grammatical phonetical, morphological and syntactical) features (Gostony 1975, pp. 175ss., esp. 194ss.).

    The correspondences between Hungarian and the „Turanian“ and „Non-Turanian“ languages are according to Gostony (1975, pp. 201s.):

    Hungarian: 51%;
    Turk languages: 29%;
    Caucasian languages: 24%,
    Northern Finno-Ugric languages: 21%;
    Tibeto-Burmanic languages: 12%;
    Munda-Khol languages: 9%;
    Paleo-Sibirian languages: 8%;
    Oceanic languages: 7%;
    Akkadian: 55;
    Sanskrit: 5%;
    Dravidian languages: 5%;
    Chinese: 5%,
    Indo- European languages: 4%;
    Bask: 4%;
    Hamitic languages: 3%;
    Japanese: 3%.

    In view of that, Charles Dombi comes to the following conclusion: “Thus, from the evidence left by this process of colonization, it appears that the Sumerian city-states were able to exert a preponderant economic, cultural, linguistic and ethnic influence during several thousand years not only in Mesopotamia and the rest of the Near East, but also beyond, in the Mediterranean Basin, in the Danubian Basin, in the regions North of the Caucasus and of the Black Sea, the Caspian-Aral, Volga- Ural, and Altai regions, as well as in Iran and India. It seems therefore that the Sumerians and their civilization had a determining influence not only on later Near-Eastern civilizations, but also on the Mediterranean, Indian, and even Chinese civilizations, as well as on the formation of the various Eurasian ethno-linguistic groups" (Dombi 2001, p. 7).

    C.Dombi missed, and A.Toth did not note that even in the scenario where Sumerians were the most progressive people in the world, and would love to spread their culture around the world, it is the mobility of the people that could spread a cultural trait of language far and wide, and the Sumerians were not mounted nomadic people able to cross large distances and hold their own in hostile conditions. Sumerians were agricultural people tied to their plots, and did not have horse husbandry. It were only the surrounding horse-mounted pastoral nomadic people who could propagate elements of Sumerian around the Eurasia, and leave the same archeological markers, like the uniquely socketed axe-heads, both in the Mesopotamia and Manchuria. Allowing that the Türkic nomadic tribes were responsible for the Türkic layer in the Sumerian would allow to make impossible possible: the same influence of the Türkic is found in the Sumerian and in the Tibeto-Burmanic languages, bridging the opposite ends of Asia.
    - 30 -


    Blažek, Vaclav, Basic word lists of ancient languages of the Near East. In: Dhumbadji! 3/1, 1997, pp.  7- 14
    Bobula, Ida, Sumerian Affiliations. Washington, DC 1951
    Bobula, Ida, A sumir-magyar rokonsag kerdese. Buenos Aires 1982
    Bobula, Ida, Herencia de Sumeria. Cordoba 1967
    Bobula, Ida, Ketezer magyar nev sumir eredete. Montreal 1970
    Bobula, Ida, Origin of the Hungarian Nation. Gainesville FL 1966
    Dombi, Charles (Karoly), The controversy of the origins and early history of the Hungarians. In: http://www.hunmagyar.org/history/hungaria.htm
    Elbert, Samuel H., Internal relationships of polynesian languages and dialects, in: Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 9, 1953, pp. 147-153
    Erdelyi, Istvan, Selkupisches Worterverzeichnis. Budapest 1970
    Erdy, Miklos, A sumir, ural-altaji, magyar rokonsag kutatasanak tortenete. New York 1974
    Forster, Peter, Toth, Alfred und Bandelt, Hans-Jurgen, Evolutionary network analysis of word lists: visualising the relationship between Alpine Romance languages. In: Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5/3, 1998, pp.
    Forster, Peter und Toth, Alfred, Toward a phylogenetic chronology of ancient Gaulish, Celtic, and Indo-European. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 100/15 (July 2003), pp. 9079-9084
    Gostony, Colman-Gabriel, Dictionnaire d’etymologie sumerienne et grammaire comparee. Paris 1975
    Gulya, Janos, Eastern Ostyak Chrestomathy. Bloomington 1966
    Halloran, J.A. und Hamori, Fred, Sumir-Ural-Altaic Dictionary. http://www2.4dcomm.com
    Katzschmann, Michael, Deutsch-nganasanisches Worterverzeichnis. Nganasanisches http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~mkatzsc/d2_a_h.htm
    Lagercrantz, Eliel, Worterbuch des Sudlappischen. Oslo 1926
    Lako, Gyorgy et al., A magyar szokeszlet finnugor elemei. 3 Bde. Budapest 1967-1978
    Marcantonio, Angela, The Uralic language family. Oxford 2002
    Molnar, Ferenc A., On the history of word-final vowels in the Permian languages. Szeged 1974
    Munkacsi, Bernat and Kalman, Bela, Wogulisches Worterbuch. Budapest 1986
    Neumann, W., Sistematikaline Eesti-Saksa Sonaraamat. Tallinnas 1923
    Olah, Bela, Edes magyar nyelvunk szumer erdete. Buenos Aires 1980
    Rabin, Chaim, Lexicostatistics and the internal divisions of Semitic. In: Bynon, James and Theodora (Hrsg.), Hamito-Semitica. The Hague, Paris 1975, pp. 85-99
    Redei, Karoly, Northern Ostyak Chrestomathy. Bloomington 1965
    Schulze, Brigitte, Der Wortparallelismus als ein Stilmittel der (nord-)ostjakischen Volksdichtung. Szeged 1988
    - 31 -

    Sebeok, Thomas A. and Raun, Alo, The first Cheremis grammar (1775). Chicago 1956
    Sebeok, Thomas A. and Zeps, Valdis J., Concordance and thesaurus of Cheremis poetic language. ’S-Gravenhage 1961
    Steinitz, Wolfgang, Ostjakische Grammatik und Chrestomathie. Leipzig 1950
    Swadesh, Morris, Towards greater accuracy in lexicostatistic dating. In: International Journal of American Lingusitics 21, 1955, pp. 121-137
    Swadesh-Liste Estnisch: http://www.rosettaproject.org/live/search/contribute/swadesh/view?ethnocode = EST
    Swadesh-Liste Finnisch: http://www.rosettaproject.org/live/search/contribute/swadesh/view?ethnocode = FINN
    Swadesh-Liste Mordwinisch: http://www.rosettaproject.org/live/search/contribute/swadesh/view?ethnocode = MYV (Erzya)
    Szabo, Laszlo, Selkup texts. Bloomington 1967
    Wichmann, Yrjo, Syrjanischer Wortschatz, hrsg. von T.E. Uotila. Helsinki 1942
    Wiedemann, F.J., Syrjanisch-deutsches Worterbuch mit einem wotjakisch-deutschen Anhange. St.Petersburg 1880
    Wiklund, K.B., Lule-Lappisches Worterbuch. Helsingfors 1890
    Winkler, Eberhard, Udmurt. Munchen 2001
    Zakar, Andras, A sumer nyelvbCl. Fahrwangen 1975
    - 32 -

    The evaluation of the 12 Uralic lists results in the following percentages:

    Hungarian = Vogul: 41%
    Hungarian = Ostyak: 36%
    Hungarian = Syryen: 34%
    Hungarian = Votyak: 35%
    Hungarian = Cheremis: 31%
    Hungarian = Mordwin: 29%
    Hungarian = Finnic: 33%
    Hungarian = Estonian: 31%
    Hungarian = Lapponic: 26%
    Hungarian = Nganasan: 14%
    Hungarian = Selkup: 12%
    Average: 29.27%

    Vogul = Ostyak: 59%
    Vogul = Syryen: 28%
    Vogul = Votyak: 32%
    Vogul = Cheremis: 28%
    Vogul = Mordwin: 22%
    Vogul = Finnic: 30%
    Vogul = Estonian: 29%
    Vogul = Lapponic: 21%
    Vogul = Nganasan: 15%
    Vogul = Selkup: 13%
    Average: 27.6%

    Ostyak = Syryen: 31%
    Ostyak = Votyak: 31%
    Ostyak = Cheremis: 29%
    Ostyak = Mordwin: 23%
    Ostyak = Finnic: 25%
    Ostyak = Estonian: 25%
    Ostyak = Lapponic: 25%
    Ostyak = Nganasan: 16%
    Ostyak = Selkup: 11%
    Average: 24.0%

    - 33 -

    Syryen = Votyak: 64%
    Syryen = Cheremis: 33%
    Syryen = Mordwin: 27%
    Syryen = Finnic: 31%
    Syryen = Estonian: 30%
    Syryen = Lapponic: 23%
    Syryen = Nganasan: 16%
    Syryen = Selkup: 11%
    Average: 29.38%

    Votyak = Cheremis: 37%
    Votyak = Mordwin: 30%
    Votyak = Finnic: 34%
    Votyak = Estonian: 35%
    Votyak = Lapponic: 25%
    Votyak = Nganasan: 14%
    Votyak = Selkup: 12%
    Average: 26.7 %

    Cheremis (Mari) = Mordwin: 30%
    Cheremis (Mari) = Finnic: 32%
    Cheremis (Mari) = Estonian: 30%
    Cheremis (Mari) = Lapponic: 26%
    Cheremis (Mari) = Nganasan: 14%
    Cheremis (Mari) = Selkup: 12%
    Average: 24.0%

    Mordwin = Finnic: 29%
    Mordwin = Estonian: 25%
    Mordwin = Lapponic: 23%
    Mordwin = Nganasan: 12%
    Mordwin = Selkuph: 11%
    Average: 20.0%

    Finnic = Estonian: 73%
    Finnic = Lapponic: 34%
    Finnic = Nganasan: 15%
    Finnic = Selkup: 14%
    Average: 34.0%
    - 34 -

    Estonian = Lapponic: 31%
    Estonian = Nganasan: 15%
    Estonian = Selkup: 13%
    Average: 19.67%

    Laponic = Nganasan: 12%
    Lapponic = Selkup: 8%
    Average: 10.0%

    Nganasan = Selkup: 22%
    Average: 22.0%

    Average Finno-Ugric: 31.91%
    Average Uralic: 24.54%

    Total average Finno-Ugric-Uralic: 23.33%

    Generally, according to Swadesh (1955) a language keeps each 1000 years 86% from its vocabulary.

    Therefore we get the following table:

    After 1000 years: 86% After 7000 years: 34.8%
    After 2000 years: 73.96% After 8000 years: 29.92%
    After 3000 years: 63.6% After 9000 years: 25.73%
    After 4000 years: 54.7% After 10’000 years: 22.13%
    After 5000 years: 47.04% After 11’000 years: 19.03%, etc.
    After 6000 years: 40.46%    

     According to the calculated percentages, Proto-Uralic should have existed therefore about 9000 years ago. The separation of the Samoyed languages (Nganasan and Selkup) from Lapponic should have happened even about 11’000 years ago, i.e. still 2000 years before Proto-Uralic, whose members they are! As one can see very easily, both the hypothesis of a Finno-Ugric and of an Uralic language family lead themselves ad absurdum. Languages with such small common lexical stock can best be considered Sprachbunde (loose language complexes), but never language families. Principally, also the question arises, if it is possible to reconstruct languages at 11’000 and more years back. Concretely speaking, this would mean – since the Uralic languages are a member of the Nostratic “language family” -, that the latter must be still several thousands, if not ten-thousands of years older then Proto-Uralic: an assumption that very probably has to be considered in the light of glottogony as pure nonsense.
    - 35 -

    4. Comparing Hungarian etymologies

    from standard etymological dictionaries

    We compare the etymologies of the 100 words in the basic Swadesh-List, as given in the following four standard Hungarian etymological dictionaries, whose abbreviations we use in the list that follows:

    Barczi = Barczi, Geza: Magyar szofeitC szotar. Budapest 1941
    BenkC 1 = BenkC, Lorand (ed.), A magyar nyelv torteneti-etimologiai szotara. Budapest 1967ff.
    Lako = Lako Gyorgy (ed.), A magyar szokeszlet finnugor elemei. 3 vols. Budapest 1967ff.
    BenkC 2 = BenkC, Lorand (ed.), Etymologisches Worterbuch des Ungarischen. 3 vols. Budapest 1992ff.

    Further abbreviations:
    UR = Uralic origin,
    FU = Finno-Ugric origin,
    U = Ugric origin,
    Tu = borrowing from a Turk language (including Turkish),
    Sl = borrowing from a Slavic language,
    — = unknown or uncertain origin.
     = = (only in Lako) means, that the word in question is not present in all (or in none of) the UR or FU languages.

    As usual, derivations do not count, i.e. only the etymology of the stem of a word is considered (ex. g. farok, ferfi, szemely, etc.) (This principle should be applied across the board, not only for selected topics).
    - 36 - 38 -

      Hung. Engl. Bárczi BenkE 1 Lakó BenkE 2
    1 adni to give FU FU  = = FU
    2 allni to stand FU FU  = = FU
    3 aludni to sleep FU FU  = = FU
    4 az that FU UR  = = UR
    5 bor skin U/FU? UR?  = = UR
    6 csillag star FU? FU?  = = FU
    7 csont bone FU?  = =
    8 egni to burn FU FU?  = = FU?
    9 egy one FU?  = =
    10 ej night FU FU  = = FU
    11 en I FU UR
    12 enni to eat FU FU  = = FU
    13 eso rain FU UR  = = UR
    14 ez this U UR  = = UR
    15 fa tree FU UR  = = UR
    16 farok tail FU UR  = = U (UR?)
    17 feher white  = =
    18 fej head FU FU (UR?)  = = UR
    19 fekete black U? U?  = = U?
    20 fekudni to lie (down) FU?  = =
    21 felhC cloud FU FU  = = FU
    22 ferfi man FU FU  = = FU
    23 fog tooth FU FU  = = FU
    24 forro hot FU? UR?  = =
    25 fold earth  = =
    26 ful ear FU FU  = = FU
    27 fust smoke U? (FU? ) U  = = U
    28 gyoker root FU U  = = U
    29 haj hear U U  = =
    30 hal fish FU UR  = = UR
    31 hallani to hear FU FU (UR?) FU
    32 halni to die FU UR  = = UR
    33 hamu ashes FU U (FU?)  = = FU?
    34 harapni to bite FU?  = = FU?
    35 has belly  = =
    36 hegy mountain FU? (UR?)  = =
    37 hideg cold  = =
    38 hold moon FU UR  = = UR
    39 homok sand Tu Tu  = = Tu
    40 hosszu long FU UR  = = UR
    41 hus meat  = =
    42 inni to drink FU FU  = = FU
    43 jo good U U  = = U
    44 jonni to come U (FU?) U (FU?)  = = U (FU?)
    45 karom claw  = = — (lacking)
    46 kereg bark FU FU  = = FU (lacking)
    47 kerek round FU? FU  = = FU
    48 kettC two FU UR FU (UR?)
    49 kez hand FU FU UR FU
    50 ki? who? FU FU (UR?)  = = FU (UR?)
      Hung. Engl. Bárczi BenkE 1 Lakó BenkE 2
    51 kis small Tu Tu  = = Tu
    52 kC stone FU FU  = = FU
    53 kutya dog  = =
    54 lab leg, foot FU?  = = UR
    55 latni to see UR?  = = UR?
    56 level leaf U (FU?) U (FU?)  = =
    57 madar bird  = =
    58 mag seed FU  = = FU?
    59 maj liver FU UR FU UR
    60 mell breast FU FU  = = FU
    61 menni to go FU UR  = = UR
    62 mi we FU UR UR UR
    63 mi? what? FU UR  = = UR
    64 minden all  = =
    65 mondani to say FU? UR?  = = UR?
    66 nagy big  = =
    67 nap day, sun  = =
    68 nem no, not FU FU  = = FU?
    69 nev name FU UR  = = UR
    70 nC women  = = UR
    71 nyak neck  = =
    72 nyelv tongue FU  = = FU
    73 orr nose FU FU (UR?)  = = FU (UR?)
    74 olni to kill FU FU  = = FU
    75 piros red  = =
    76 repulni to fly FU  = =
    77 sarga yellow Tu Tu  = =
    78 sok many, much FU FU  = = FU
    79 szaj mouth FU UR  = = UR
    80 szaraz dry FU FU  = = FU
    81 szarv horn FU FU  = = FU
    82 szem eye FU UR UR UR
    83 szemely person FU UR  = = UR
    84 sziv heart FU UR  = = UR
    85 te you (sg.) FU UR  = = UR
    86 tele full FU FU  = =
    87 terd knee Tu Tu  = = Tu
    88 tetg louse FU FU  = = FU?
    89 tojas egg FU  = =
    90 toll feather FU UR  = = UR
    91 tudni to know FU UR  = = UR
    92 tgz fire U U  = = U
    93 uj new FU FU  = = FU
    94 uszni to swim FU UR  = = UR
    95 ut way, street UR  = = U (UR?)
    96 ulni to sit U  = =
    97 ver blood FU FU FU FU
    98 viz water FU UR  = = UR
    99 zold green  = =
    100 zsir fat Sl Sl  = = Sl

    We now evaluate this list and show the development of Finno-Ugric linguistics in the past 65 years. Statistics of word origin brings the following results:

      Ur FU U Tu Sl doubtful uncertain/unknown
    Barczi 0 56 5 4 1 13 21
    Benko1 24 26 5 4 1 14 25
    Lako 5 3          
    Benko 2 26 23 4 3 1 15 28

    The same Barczi, according to whom only 61% of the basic vocabulary of Hungarian is shown here to be FU and U, asserted in his book “A magyar nyelv eletraja” (Budapest, 3 rd ed. 1975) that the share of FU or U words, respectively, is “not under 75%”.

    Considering that UR was before the 4th millennium BC, FU about the 3rd mill. BC and U around the 1st mill. BC (cf. Istvan Fodor, Verecke hires utjan, Budapest 1975), between 13% and 15% of the Hungarian basic vocabulary ranges in a time space of not less than 3000 years (these are the “doubtful” words, that have been marked in the list by the question mark).

    Despite (or because?) of increasing research in Samoyedic linguistics, the percentage of uncertain/unknown etymologies grew from 21% to 28%.

    If one follows the very strict rules imposed to historical language comparison by Gerhard Doerfer in his article “Bemerkungen zur linguistischen Klassifikation” (“Remarks to linguistic classification”, in: Indogermanische Forschungen 76, 1971), only 8% of the Hungarian basic vocabulary have a “proven” UR, FU, or U origin, i.e. for 92% of the basic vocabulary there is nothing such as a “proof”, that UR or FU build a “language family” and U builds one of the nodes of this “family”. This goes together with the results of Angela Marcantonio in her article “A case study within Uralic” (2004): “The key Ugric node, on which the family was historically based, has never been reconstructed, and it is widely recognized that Hungarian is radically different in morphology, lexicon, and phonology from its supposed siblings in the Ugric node”.

    In an earlier publication “Is there a Finno-Ugric or even an Uralic language family?” (2006), I have already demonstrated on the basis of the Hungarian basic words themselves, that there is neither an Uralic nor a Finno-Ugric family. In this present article I have shown, that according to the etymological reconstruction of the Hungarian basic vocabulary by the four standard etymological dictionaries, there isn’t either an Uralic nor a Finno-Ugric language family. Uralistics and Finno-Ugristics change their opinion about UR, FU, U, loanwords or uncertain and unknown origin of Uralic and Finno-Ugric works with each dictionary – without being able to show the reasons. Of these possible reasons is for sure not better insight on the basis of further results, since – as Marcantonio correctly remarked: “Most studies of the Uralic languages (...) do not state the sound-rules on which the correlations are supposed to be based”.

    Therefore, the main result of the present study is, that Uralistics and Finno-Ugristics are pseudo-sciences that work on the basis of kling-klang-etymologies.
    - 39 -

    15. Turkish and Hungarian

    1. Introduction

    To compare Turkish and Hungarian is kind of a risky business, since both languages claimed and still claim to be the inheritors of the Sumerians, the representatives of the first high culture on earth. For Turkish, one should consult the exhaustive study of Laut (2000), especially the chapters about the “Sun Theory” (Gunes Dil Teorisi) (Funny, the “Sun Theory” is well-known among special circles outside of the Türkic milieu, but remains totally unknown on the inside. Maybe it is a specialized bacteria that prays only on vulnerable linguists, who knows?). Therefore, it is not astonishing at all that amongst the abundance of comparative linguistic literature both on the Turkish and on the Hungarian side we find many treatises that have been written more or less openly with nationalistic purposes. Moreover, the oldest Turkish texts date from the 8th century BC (i.e. AD, and not 8th c., but 6th c.) and the oldest Hungarian texts from the 12th century BC (i.e. AD), while Sumerian was extinct already around 1800 BC, so that the time difference between the youngest Sumerian and the oldest Turkish and Hungarian testimonies, respectively, are rather enormous – not to speak about the philological problems involved in Sumerian. In order to avoid biased data, we thus compare again Turkish and Hungarian not directly, but via their common Sumerian roots, using Gostony (1975) for Sumerian and Hungarian and Sara (1994, 1999) for Hungarian and Turkish.

    The following map shows how widespread the Turkic languages are:
    (Omitted a faulty biased map from Wikipedia that misses Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tuva, East Turkistan, and many other areas)

    In the following, I present 577 Hungarian-Sumerian-Turkish etymologies. Yet, in very few cases I have given a word from another member of the Turkic language family, when no Turkish etymology was at hand (e.g. (Chuv.), Chagatai, Yakut, Uighur), in one case (no. 722) (out of 577?) I have even added an obvious etymology by myself, since Sara must have forgotten it by chance. It must be pointed out, however, that the present work cannot and does not want to be a comparative dictionary of the Turkic languages. Whoever is interested in finding out, in which other Turkic languages than Turkish a certain reflex exists, should consult the excellent “Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages” by Starostin, Dybo and Mudrak (2003) with its 2800 etymologies (The Dictionary is based on a creationist family tree model, and must be taken with corrections to compensate for obvious bias).
    - 603 -

    2. Hungarian-Sumerian-Turkish Etymologies
    (additional/alternate Türkic correspondences are shown in Italic blue)

    Comparison of the Hung. and Türk. (essentially, nearly exclusively Turkish) forms indicates a persistent presence of the Hung. anlaut consonant (predominantly h) in the Hung. - Türk. cognates. That indicates a borrowing from the Ogur Türkic dialect(s), which is consistent with the known historical symbiosis between the Hungarian Magyars and the Türkic Kubar group of the Bulgars. For comparative purposes, nearly exclusive use of the eastern Oguz languages (Turkish is a syncretic language of numerous Türkic languages, with a predominance of the eastern Oguz base) leaves out the lexeme forms with anlaut consonant (so-called j-king and ch-king languages), and the lexus of the j-king and ch-king languages, potentially more suitable for genetic comparison. The lexus of the modern western languages is either substantially different from the eastern languages, or carries relicts inherited from the Hun, Bulgar, Suvar, Esegel, Kayi, Alan, Avar, and Khazar Ogur-type languages. The deficient lexical set, along with the ambiguity of undefined Sumer lexemes makes the comparisons quite conditional.

    The T in the Ass. column highlights words with fairly good outer phonetical correspondence and close semantics between the Sumerian and Türkic forms. Out of 577-word list, only 296 words, or 51% display genetic connection. The other 281 words are either semantically or phonetically incompatible, and are marked as kling-klang? Some of them may be confirmed at a closer analysis that would need substantial elaboration to make a case, but it is unlikely that the ratio 51% - 49% would be significantly affected. The comments do not address the Hungarian-Sumerian relationship, since the Sumerian semantic was completely left out, and therefore may be subject to the same kling-klang methodology as that suffered by the Türkic examples. That is further impacted by some ambiguity in reconstructed Sumerian phonetics, possibility that the phonetical arsenal used in phonetical reconstructions is inadequate to relay the Sumerian words, the presence in the reconstructions of a noise from the Semitic influence, and potentially conflating grammatical morphemes with the Sumerian stem. Given the ramifications of such obstacles, the error of numerical valuation should be accounted for, provisionally guessed at roughly 20-30%.

    Table pages 604 - 685
    (with some emendations to stay within stated tenets: affixes separated from the stems by a dash mark (-), spelling corrected, semantics clarified)
      Hung. Engl. Sum. Hu-Sum
    Turk. Hu-Tr Ass. References (Hung.) Comments for Türkic column
    1 a, az that (ash) S ish in: ish-bu “ecce!”
    şu (shu) (pron.)
    T Š 480; Gost. 835; Sara 1994, p. 19  
    2 ad-ni
    to give
    ag, ang
    tah, dah=add to , give
    add-ir=wage; dehi=tax
    S at-mak “to throw”
    bireü, ber, ver, tapčur, tapsur, tapuš
      Š 183; MSL III 202, 291; Gost. 305; Sara 1994, p. 10 -mak is not a stem; what “throw” has to do with “give”? Hu. –ni = is infinitive affix
    3 ág branch a
    gen=limb of a tree
      agach “tree, wood” T Š 334; Gost. 124; Sara 1994, p. 10  
    4 agy brain ugu = skull
    a’gu = brain
    S beyin, meyin, meng “brain”   Š 412/2, 3; MSL III 120, 374; Gost. 211; Sara 1994, p. 11  
    5 ágy bed aka?
    (ges) nud
    dag=resting place
      yatak T Š 97/8, 12; Gost. 796; Sara 1994, p. 11  
    6 aj
    fold, opening, hole
    to carve
    tun, nundum=lip
    ig=door, a-tu = doorkeeper
      agiz “mouth, mouth of a river”   Š 334; Gost. 929; Sara 1994, p. 12 “mouth, mouth of a river” < “lip”?
    7 akar-ni want ag, aka   yakar-mak T Š 97; MSL III 291; Gost. 304, 433a, 685; Sara 1994, p. 13 -mak is not a stem
    8 akol fence for sheep (corral ) udul, utul = sheep
    e2amaš = sheepfold
      okol “corral , pen, fold” T Gost. 716; Sara 1999, pp. 15s. Eng. corral
    9 ál- false al-am, al-an
    (la- = negative, -am = to be)
      al, yal- “false” T Š 358/3, 4; Gost. 604; Sara 1994, p. 14  
    10 alak form alam,
    alan = statue
      kılık “out(side)”
    kep, yang
      Š 358/3, 4; Gost. 604; Sara 1994, p. 14  
    11 áll-ni to stand gal, al, al-ang, al-si   ulu “big”   Š 80; MSL III 176; Gost. 332, 874; Sara 1994, p. 14 what “big” has to do with “stand”?
    12 álom (-om = formative affix)
    (*dh > l *odhame)
    sleep; dream a-a-lum, alam, alan
     udi = dream
      uyku “sleep”
    udï, töl “sleep”
      Š 358/3, 4; Gost. 472, 604; Sara 1994, p. 15  
    13 al-ud-ni, al-sz-ik, aluv- to sleep al-am, alan   uyu-mak   Š 358/3, 4; Gost. 604; Sara 1994, p. 15 -mak is not a stem
    14 ám well, although, indeed it is am = it is , indeed   ama “but, though” T Gost. 830; Sara 1994, p. 15  
    15 ángy sister-in-law e-gi4-a   yenge “sister-in-law” T Š 324; Gost. 469; Sara 1994, p. 15  
    16 anya mother ama   ene, ani T Gost. 436; Sara 1994, p. 15  
    17 apa father ab, ab-ba   aba T Gost. 434; Sara 1994, p. 16  
    18 apro,
    apro-lék, (n)
    apro-lék-os, (adj)
    apro-ság (n)
    very small,
    small parts of anyth.
    amar   ufat-mak “to cut in small pieces, to hash”   Š 437; MSL III 155; Gost. 751; Sara 1994, p. 16 -mak is not a stem; what “small” has to do with “cut”?
    19 ár   flood a, a-ma-ru ,
    uru 2,5,18 = flood
      art-mak “to get ,bigger to rise”   Š 579; Gost. 37, 141; Sara 1994, p. 16 -mak is not a stem; what “bigger, rise” has to do with “flood”?
    20 ár = price
    ér = value, worth
    price har(-ra)
    sam = price
      ora-mak “to measure”
    aγïr, ağïr “price”
    T Š 401; 152b, c; Gost. 606; Sara 1994, p. 16 -mak is not a stem; Avesta arga
    21 arany
    (also implies shiny)
    gold ar, ara = shine, bright,clear   zerrin “golden”
    altun “gold”
      Š 451; 381; Gost. 284, 285; Sara 1994, p. 17  
    22 arat-ni = harvest
    irt = to cut down
    to harvest ur4, uru   ora-mak T Š 594/2; 56, 5; MSL III 269, 270; Gost. 397, 802, 803; Sara 1994, p. 17 -mak is not a stem; Eng. ard “plow”
    23 árnyék shadow ar   arı “bad”   Š 451; Gost. 284; Sara 1994, p. 17 what “bad” has to do with “shadow”?
    24 ás-ni
    to dig,
    al-zu   es-mek “to dig” T Gost. 639; Sara 1994, p. 18  
    25 asszony = lady, married woman of rank.
    nö = woman
    woman gal, gašan (gashan)   oxšu
    arsu hermaphrodite
    àčï older woman
    ebči/evči woman
    qïz unmarried woman
    T Š 80; MSL III 176; Gost. 332, 457; Sara 1999, p. 19 gašan ~ katun = queen ?
    26 átk-oz-ni
    to curse
    aštug (ashtug)   itik “sharp, insulting, rude”   Š 339; Gost. 17; Sara 1994, p. 18 what “rude” has to do with “curse”?
    27 atya father ad, ad-da   ata T Gost. 435; Sara 1994, p. 18  
    28 baj = trouble
    bal = left, bad luck
    trouble bal   bela “disluck, poverty” (Arabic)
    bäd “bad”
    T Š 9; MSL III 79/1; Gost. ad 288; Sara 1994, p. 20 Suggested Turk. bela “disluck, poverty” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    29 báj charm
    ba   ba “bandage, bundle, shackle” (OT)   Š 461; Gost. 34 Sara 1999, p. 20 kling-klang?
    30 bal,
    bal, ba   aly “bad” (OT)
    alyγ “bad” (OT)
    bäd “bad”
      Š 9; 352a; MSL III 79/1; Gost. ad 288, 588; Sara 1994, p. 21 kling-klang?
    31 balta axe bal   balta T Gost. 648 Sara 1999, p. 20 Eng. blade
    32 bálvány idol alam, alan   balbal “grave statue” (OT) T Š 358/3, 4; Gost. 604 Sara 1999, pp. 20s.  
    33 bársony velvet bar   barčin (barchin) “velvet” (OT) T Gost. 679 Sara 1999, p. 22  
    34 bendö,
    old bende
    paunch (belly) ti, banda (?)   bandı-mak “to soak”   Š 73; 144; Gost. 222, 449; Sara 1994, p. 24 -mak is not a stem; what “soak” has to do with “belly”?
    35 bérr
    salary; rent
    to rent
    ubara   behre “part” (Persian)
    manču, tölač, yaqa “payment”
      Š 152(4); MSL III 351; Gost. 518; Sara 1994, p. 24 Suggested Turk. behre “salary; rent” (Persian) is a borrowing.
    36 bika bull alim   boga   Š 421/3, 6; Gost. 737 Sara 1999, p. 24  
    37 bir-ni to possess; to stand; to be able to bur = release, free, spread   biriktir-mak “to gather together”   Š 11/2, 7; Gost. 495; Sara 1994, p. 25 -mak is not a stem; kling-klang?
    38 bog knot mug?   bag “bundle, sheaf T Š 3; Gost. 616; Sara 1994, p. 27  
    39 bogár beetle bur5   böcek (böjek) “beetle” T Š 79x; Gost. 782 Sara 1999, p. 24  
    40 boldog, bodog happy ba-dug(-ga)
    dug = happy, sweet
      bol “abundant, generous”   Gost. 132; Sara 1994, pp. 27s. kling-klang?
    41 bor
    ferment, boil
    bur   bor “wine” (OT) T Š 349/1, 2, 4; 349; Gost. 574, 711 Sara 1999, p. 25  
    42 borda rib bar   kaburga “rib” T Š 74/58, 105; Gost. 205a Sara 1999, p. 25  
    43 bödön keg (i.e. trunk, cylindrical jar) dug-udul4, bu-gi-in   bod “body, trunk, belly T LM 143; Gost. 536, 671 Sara 1999, p. 26  
    44 bög-ni to howl ug4   bogur-mek “to howl” T Š 381; Gost. 780; Sara 1994, p. 30 -mek is not a stem
    45 bögre cup urrub, ursub   bakı “copper, from copper”   Š 309; Gost. 538; Sara 1994, p. 31 kling-klang?
    46 bör,
    skin, leather
    suitcase (i.e. sheaf)
    bar, bar   deri “skin”,
    burulu “envelope, cover”
    T Š 74/58, 105; Gost. 205a, 206; Sara 1994, p. 32  
    47 büdös stinky bid3, be5, bi7   ıdı “smell, taste” T Š 536; Gost. 115 Sara 1999, p. 27  
    48 büz to stink, stench hab, bid3, be5, bi7   boz “bad”
    yïdï “stink”
      Š 483/15; 536; 511/12; Gost. 94, 115, 704 Sara 1999, p. 28 kling-klang?
    49 csák-ány (chekany)
    ság = peak,point, hill
    pickaxe šum (shum)   cak-mak (jak-) “to hit, to beat, to hit out, to cut out”
    kerkï “pickaxe”
      Š 126; Gost. 356; Sara 1994, p. 37 -mak is not a stem
    50 csapni(chapni) to hit dow, smash šub (shub)   cap-mak (jap-) “to hit, to hit down” (OT)   Š 68/13; Gost. 273; Sara 1994, p. 38 -mak is not a stem
    51 csata (chata)
    to tie up?, to clasp, join
    šudul (shudul) ,
    šudun (shudun)
    sad = battle
      catis-mak (jatis-) “to get into a fight, to start fighting”   Š 549; Gost. 593; Sara 1994, p. 39 -mak is not a stem
    52 csecs (chech) tits; udder šeš (shesh)   čeč (chech) “bundle; barn; pile”   Š 331; Gost. 458; Sara 1994, p. 39 what “bundle; barn; pile” has to do with “tits; udder”?
    53 csekely (chekely) scarce gin   sığ (si, sig) “shallow, flat, small”   Š 595; Gost. 545; Sara 1994, p. 40  
    54 csel (chel) ,
    cselekedni (chelekedni)
    ruse, trick
    to make, to do
    sil5, šilig (shlig)   işle-mek (ishle-) “to work” T Š 152/4, 8; 44; Gost. 103, 241; Sara 1994, p. 40 -mak is not a stem, what does “work” have to do with “ruse, trick”?
    55 csemege (chemege) delicacy šem (shem)   yemek “to eat” T Š 215; Gost. 789; Sara 1994, p. 40 -mak/-mek is not a stem; Eng. eat.
    56 csempe (chempe) tile, ceramic še-ba (sheba)   canip (janip) “side, page” (Arabic)   Gost. 674; Sara 1994, p. 41 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. canip “side, page” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    57 csendes (chendes) ,
    csend (chend)
    quietness (adj),
    quiet (noun)
    š12-me-(en) (sh12-me-(en)), ten   čıgıda-mak (chıgıda-) “to sound, to ring”   Š 103a/3; 376; Gost. 63, 349; Sara 1994, p. 41 -mak is not a stem
    58 csépelni (chahpelni) ,
    csép (chap)
    to thresh,
    threshing flail
    šib (shib) ,dib   čap-mak (chap-) “to hit, to beat” T Š 68; 537/10, 20; Gost. 274, 275 Sara 1999, pp. 31s. -mak is not a stem
    59 csepp (chepp ),
    csep-eg-ni (chepegni)
    drop, drip
    to be dripping
    šex (sheks?)   şıp (shyp) “dropping” T Gost. 659; Sara 1994, p. 41 Eng. sip
    60 csere (chere) ,
    cser-él-ni (cheralni)
    to exchange
    gi4 = exchange
    su bala = change
      čerči (cherchi) “exporting” T Š 376; Gost. 347; Sara 1994, p. 42  


    csiga (chiga) ,
    csig-áz-ni (chigazni)

    to wind up, to lift



    čivga (chivga) “horn”


    Š 55; Gost. 742; Sara 1994, p. 42


    62 csik (chik) ,
    sig   čizgi (chizgi) “line, stripe” T Š 539; Gost. 527, 761; Sara 1994, p. 42  
    63 csikorogni (chikorogni ) to shriek si-gar   čak (chak) “sound of two objects crash into one another” T Š 112/148; Gost. 577; Sara 1994, p. 42  
    64 csillag (chillag) ,
    csillog-ni (chillogni)
    to shine
    zalag, zal, zil(-la)   jıldız (yildiz) “star”;
    cilâh (jileh) “shining”
    T Š 381, 393; 231; 126/58; Gost. 91, 359, 360, 370; Sara 1994, p. 43  
    65 csip-ni (chipni) to pinch šib (shib)   čimdik (chimdik) “pinching” T Š 68; Gost. 274 Sara 1999, p. 33  
    66 csomo (chomo) knot šum (shum) , zum   cemi (jemi) “gathering together, unification” T Š 126; 555/8; 319; Gost. 356, 609; Sara 1994, p. 44  
    67 csonka (chonka)
    csonkitani (chonkitani)
    to cripple
    šum (shum)   conak (jonak) “with crippled fingers/toes” T Š 126; Gost. 356; Sara 1994, p. 44  
    68 csordulni (chordulni) to flow over zar   şarla-mak (shar-) “to trickle, to run” T Š 491; Gost. 368; Sara 1994, p. 44 -la, -mak are not a stem
    69 csö (cho) pipe ...te   cubuk (chubuk) “switch, twig, pipe
    sibak “pipe”
      Gost. 612; Sara 1994, p. 44  
    70 csökönyös (chökönyös) stubborn sig   čekin-mek (chekin-) “to keep o.s. out of s.th.”   Š 295; Gost. 322; Sara 1994, p. 45 -mak is not a stem; kling-klang?
    71 csucs (chucs) peak šuš, šu-si (shush, shusi)   (uch) “peak, end” T Š 354; Gost. 186, 516; Sara 1994, p. 45  
    72 csupor (chupor) little pot zurzub   sap “handle”   Š 309; Gost. 537; Sara 1994, p. 46 kling-klang?
    73 dag-ad-ni,
    to swell,
    dugud   dag “mountain” T Gost. 173; Sara 1994, p. 47  
    74 dajka nurse (baby nurse) ga   taya “nurse” T Š 319; Gost. 702 Sara 1999, p. 34 Eng. tender/ME tenden , good match
    75 dal
    old dalu, dalol-ni
    to sing
    tal, du12 = sing, dug = speak   dilemek “to ask for, to beg”
    tili “speech, language”
    et-, ïrla-, kogla-, köglan-, ot-, sayra-, sàma-, säma-, yïrla-, yurla-, “sing”
    T Š 211; MSL III 323; Gost. 108, 517; Sara 1994, p. 47 -mek is not a stem; Eng. sing
    76 darázs (darahj) wasp giriš (girish)   arı “bee” T Š 400/4 (?); Gost. 745; Sara 1999, p. 35 Eng. api-
    77 derék (derahk) honest diri(g)   direk “pillar”   MSL III 142/176; Gost. 187; Sara 1999, p. 35  
    78 derg (dereng? Uncommon) sunshine duru   diril-mek “to revive, to liven up”   Š 536; Gost. 182; Sara 1994, p. 48 -mek is not a stem
    79 dij salary; tax, prize di   diyet “blood price” (Arabic) T Gost. 485; Sara 1994, p. 49 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. diyet “blood price” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    80 dísz (diis) decoration d-DIŠ (d-DISH)   dizi “row, line”   LM 480; Gost. 23; Sara 1994, p. 49  
    81 diszno (disno)
    sah, sigga = pig
      sisna “pig” ((Chuv.))   Š 467; Gost. 715; Sara 1999, p. 36  
    82 dob drum dub   tep-mek “to kick, to push”   Š 138; Gost. 190; Sara 1994, p. 50 -mek is not a stem
    83 dob-ni to throw dub   tep-ele-mek “to beat, to hit”   Š 138; Gost. 340; Sara 1994, p. 50  
    84 domb,
    du6, dubur, du6, dul   depe “hill” T Š 459; 400/2, 3; Gost. 61a, 228, 262; Sara 1994, p. 50  
    85 döf-ni to stab du7   dov-mek “to hit, to beat” T Š 441; Gost. 258; Sara 1994, p. 50  
    86 dög carrion tag   dokul-mek “to fall” T LM 229; Gost. 500; Sara 1994, p. 51 -mak are not a stem; “carrion” = “fallen”?
    87 döng-öl-ni to stamp out du, dumgal   dog-mek “to knock, to make a racket” T Š 224; Gost. 257, 717; Sara 1999, p. 36 -mek is not a stem
    88 dönteni to turn upside down; to decide
    to topple
    tun, tu10, dun, tun   dondur-mek “to turn around, to translate”;
    dunder “to knock over”
    T Š 89/2, 3, 8; 595/19; Gost. 372, 623; Sara 1994, p. 51 -mek is not a stem
    89 dörög-ni
    dörgés D<>G ?
    to thunder  
    gir-gir(-ri)   guruldemek “to thunder”
    dorgut “to thunder” (Yakut)
    T Š 10; Gost. 89; Sara 1994, p. 51 -mek is not a stem
    90 dörzs-öl-ni (dorjolni)
    reszelö “grinder”
    to rub, to scrub tuš (tush)       Gost. 426; Sara 1994, p. 51  
    91 dul-ni
    to devastate
    to topple
    du14, dun   dal “bold, naked, burnt down”
    dala-mak “to burn down”
      Š 330/42b; 467; Gost. 261, 422; Sara 1994, p. 51  
    92 düh,
    dih   dik “sharp, hurting”   Š 138/14; Gost. 234; Sara 1999, p. 37  
    93 dülö slope du6, dul   dılı “side, border, edge” T Š 459; Gost. 61a, 262; Sara 1994, p. 52  
    94 edény pot?
    dish, plate
    dug-udul4, edin = earthenware   evani “pot” T Š 143; 168/8; Gost. 536, 670; Sara 1994, p. 52  
    95 ég (*sänke)
    meny = sky,heaven
    heaven, sky e, e8, an   gök “heaven, sky”   Š 324; 381; 257; 251i; Gost. 8, 330; Sara 1994, p. 52  
    96 ég-ni to burn ag, ang, e8   yak-mak “to ignite, to burn down” T MSL III 202, 291; 381; 257; 251i; Gost. 305, 330; Sara 1994, p. 53 -mak are not a stem
    97 egy, old ig,
    gi-na, dil,   yeg, yek “one, only” (Persian)
    yalïgus, yalïguz, yalgus, galguz, yagus, yalaŋuz “one, only”
      Š 85; Gost. 181, 823; Sara 1994, p. 53 Suggested Turk. yeg, yek “one, only” (Persian) is a borrowing
    98 éj night, north gig, ge6 (*j>g)   ay “moon”
    kečä (keche) “night”
    T Š 427; Gost. 49; Sara 1994, p. 53  
    99 ejte-ni to drop ešmen (eshmen) ,
      ayt-mak, eyt-mek “to speak”   Š 461; 308; Gost. 5, 188, 189, 429; Sara 1994, p. 53 -mak/-mek is not a stem; what “speak” has to do with “drop”?
    100 ék, (aik)
    ékjel, ékszer (ekser)
    ag, ang, ig, ek, igi-gal, aga
    Sumerian temple decorations were wedges
      ek “clip, buckle, connection, union” T Š 183; MSL III 202, 291; Š 80; 347; Gost. 305, 561, 562, 600; Sara 1994, p. 54  
    101 eke
    ék = wedge, like a plow
    plow iku, aka   ek- “to plow” (Osm.) T Š 97/8, 12; Gost. 697, 796; Sara 1999, p. 39  
    102 el- (verbal prefix) away ud-du, e, i, al   ileri “ahead, onward” T Š 381; Gost. 328, 860, 874; Sara 1994, p. 54 Interestingly, Türkic locatives are mostly relative, while Hungarian are absolute.
    103 ell-ni to give birth (animals) ud-du   ol-mak “to be, to originate”   Š 381; Gost. 328; Sara 1994, p. 54  
    104 elme mind, sense umuš um-mi-a, um-me-a   alılı “capability, talent”   Š 536/48; 134/25b, 31, 34; MSL V 13; Gost. 111, 579; Sara 1994, p. 54 kling-klang?
    105 él-ni (ailni)
    to live
    il, gal, al
    ti-la = live
      ol-mak “to be, to exist” T Š 320; 80; MSL III 176; Š 320; Gost. 151, 332, 405, 874; Sara 1994, p. 54 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    106 eme
    nös-tény = female
    female en-bar
    unu = young woman
      am “female” (OT)
    emi-/eme-/ebi-/ebe- “engender, birth-giving woman”,
    evenug “pregnant”
    T Gost. 208; Sara 1994, p. 56  
    107 emel-ni (*äle-(me)) to lift nim = high il- = lift   elle-mek “to touch”   Š 433; Gost. 164, 401; Sara 1994, p. 55 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    108 em-lék,
    to remember
    umuš (umush)   an-mak “to remember” T Š 536/48; Gost. 111; Sara 1994, p. 55 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    109 emlö, mell
    emik = suckle
    breast, teat um(-u)   em-mek “to suck” T Š 134; Gost. 437; Sara 1999, p. 39 Common in many languages, mammal etc.
    110 emse (*ema = mother) sow anš (ansh)   am “female”   Š 208; Gost. 752; Sara 1994, p. 56  
    111 én, -om I nga-e, -me   ben, men “I”
    es “I”
      Š 233; Gost. 811; Sara 1994, p. 56  
    112 ének,
    to sing
    en-ag, en-du
    en2 = incantation
      ahenk “music”   Š 546/2; Gost. 16; Sara 1994, p. 56  
    113 enged-ni
    -hat (modal suffix)
    to let, to allow ag, ang ?
    ha- = allow (modal prefix)
      in-mek “to let, to allow” T Š 183; MSL III 202, 291; Gost. 305; Sara 1994, p. 56 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    114 enyel-eg-ni to flirt eme = tongue?   eglen-mek “entertainment”   Š 32; Gost. 227; Sara 1994, p. 56 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    115 enyém
    -ém (possessive affix)
    mine nga-e   benim, menim “mine”
    -im/-m (possessive affix)
      Š 233; Gost. 811; Sara 1994, p. 56 kling-klang?
    116 enyhe,
    mild, soft,
    relief, comfort
    im, em   in-mak “to rest, to get relief” T Š 399/7, 15; Gost. 56; Sara 1994, p. 56 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    117 ép intact, healthy e   hep “all, wholly” T Š 324; Gost. 8; Sara 1994, pp. 56s.  
    118 épite-ni,
    to build, building
    to get built
    e = house + bit [Akkad]   yap-mak “to do, to make”,
    ev p>v
      Š 324; Gost. 8; Sara 1994, p. 57 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    119 ered-ni,
    arise ?, to originate,
    ur7, ur6   eri-mek “to fall to pieces, to crumble”   Š 185; Gost. 237; Sara 1999, p. 41 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    120 erkölcs (erkolch) ,
    old erköcs (erkoch)
    morality arhuš (arhush)   ık “race, lineage, tribe”   Gost. 501; Sara 1994, p. 58 kling-klang?
    121 ér-ni to be worth; to reach; to touch ir   er-mek
    eriş- “to reach”
    T Š 232/4; Gost. 314; Sara 1994, p. 57 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    122 erö
    strength, force
    giant (big)
    er, eri, erum, uru   iri “big, mighty”
    er, ir “male” ~ erk, irk “might, strength, power, will”
    T Š 50; 56, 5; Gost. 493, 802; Sara 1999, p. 41  
    123 es-ni
    to fall
    ešemen (eshemen) , e   asagi “lower”,
    asagil-mak “to settle, to fall down”
    T Š 461; 308; Gost. 5, 188, 429; Sara 1994, p. 58 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    124 fa
    tree; wood
    grass, herb
    pa (usually used for plant, leaf etc), ngeš = tree   agač (agach) “tree; wood”   Š 295, 1; 295/4, a-p; 565; Gost. 792; Sara 1994, p. 59  
    125 far ars, ass, rear bar = back,rear
    bar-ag = seat
      art “back; behind”
    köt “butt”
      Š 74/58, 86, 105; Gost. 205a; Sara 1994, p. 60 kling-klang?
    126 far-ag-ni, (*p>v)
    to carve,
    bur-gu-l(u) = carver, 
    bur = cut
      para “part, piece” (Persian)
    kert- “carve”
      Š 349/65; Gost. 575; Sara 1994, p. 60 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. para “part, piece” (Persian) is a borrowing
    127 feir, fehér, fejér white babbar, bar 6,7 = white, bright; ku-babbar   ahar “white color, painting”
    ak, kuu, sary “white”
      Š 181; 468; Gost. 155, 572; Sara 1994, p. 61  
    128 fekete black uku   pek “hard, severe, merciless” + kote “side” or ote “other side”
    kara “black”; jagïz, ölas “dark”
    T Š 482; Gost. 394; Sara 1994, p. 61 kling-klang?
    129 fel (*p>f/b),
    fö = head,chief,main
    up an = sky,high, pa(d) = up   al “high”, ala “up, above”   Š 13; Gost. 35; Sara 1994, p. 62 Up = Sum. An, pa(d), Hu. an, Tr. al “high”, ala “up, above”
    130 fel-, föl- (verbal prefix) up il = raise, lift   al “high”, ala “up, above” T Š 320; Gost. 151, 405; Sara 1994, p. 62  
    131 féreg worm;
    wolf? poetic sense?
    pirig = lion (poetic sense)   pire “flea   Š 444/19; MSL 114/205; Gost. 736; Sara 1994, p. 63  
    132 fér-fi
    fi = son, fiú = boy, úr = lord
    man er, eri, erum,  lú = man, ur = lord,king   er “man, husband” T Š 50; Gost. 493; Sara 1994, p. 63  
    133 férj
    en-bar, er, eri, erum, ni-tah   er “man, husband” T Š 50; Gost. 208, 493; Sara 1994, p. 63  
    134 fér-ni “to fit (in a space)” par   yer “place”, yerlesmek “to fit into”
    sïg “fit into”
      Š 132; Gost. 379; Sara 1994, p. 62 -mak/-mek and -les- are not stems; kling-klang?
    135 figyel-ni, ügyelni to watch out igi, ugu-la = head man (igi = eye)   vigle “watching place of the fishermen” T Š 449; Gost. 217; Sara 1994, p. 63  
    136 fog-ni,
    to seize, hold
    to receive,
    to be expecting a baby (conceive)
    pad, pag, ugu, ugun   bogus-mak “to touch, to attack”   Š 450; 78/3; 412; Gost. 364, 365, 381; Sara 1994, p. 64 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    137 foly-ni
    folyo (*fö-jo)
    to flow,
    hal, hal bis, pa6   oy-mak “to hollow out, to chisel out”   Š 2; 60; Gost. 68, 385, 555; Sara 1994, p. 64 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    138 forog-ni,
    to turn around,
    maelstrom (vortex)
    bar   bur-mak “to turn, to turn around, to screw” T Š 74/58, 105; Gost. 205a; Sara 1994, p. 65 -mak/-mek is not a stem; Eng. bore
    139 fö, fej head be, pa   bash “head” T Š 69; 295; 565; Gost. 514, 792; Sara 1994, p. 61  
    140 fö-ni, föl-ni (v/i), (*p>f)
    föz-ni (v/t)
    to cook,
    to cook
    bil (*p>b)   pis-mek “to cook”
    bula- “boil, steam, simmer (food)”
    T Š 172; Gost. 350; Sara 1994, p. 65 Eng. boil
    141 fuj-ni
    to blow;
    to blow out
    bu, bu5
    bul, bun 5,7 “blow”
      putla-mak “to blow” (blow out, up)
    es-, yelpi-, kön-, tüpir-/tüpür, ür- “to blow”
    T Š 371; LM 515; Gost. 339; Sara 1994, pp. 65s. -mak/-mek is not a stem
    142 fur-ni to drill bur, pu, bur(u)   bur-mak “to turn, to turn around, to screw” T Š 511/11; 411/39, 40, 98; Gost. 665, 703, 710; Sara 1994, p. 66 Eng. bore
    143 fül ear pi   kulak “ear” (related to Hu hear)   Gost. 226; Sara 1994, p. 66  
    144 füz-ni
    to fix, lace together
    exercise book
    u-zug   duz-mek “to line up, to put in a row”   Š 318/28; Gost. 502; Sara 1994, p. 67 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    145 ganaj, ganej dung, manure gan   gani “rich” (Arabic)
    agïl, bog, in, yïn, yundaq, kizyak, kuryuz, sag “dung”
      Gost. 695; Sara 1999, p. 48 Suggested Turk. gani “rich” (Arabic) is a borrowing; kling-klang?
    146 garat throat; mill funnel gu   gıtlak “windpipe” T Š 106; Gost. 240; Sara 1994, p. 68 r<?> t not likely
    147 gaz,
    scoundrel, weed
    giš (gish)   kazel “dry leaf” (tree ges?)   Š 296/2-6; Gost. 786; Sara 1994, p. 68  
    148 gáz-ol-ni (ghahzolni) to wade; to run s.o. over gaz   gez-mek “to go for a walk, to come, to walk around”
    bar-, evrïl-, jor- I, jorï-, jürï-, jürü-, gez-/giz-/kez-, par-“walk, wander, roam, travel”
    T Š 192; Gost. 290; Sara 1994, p. 69 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    149 gége (gaige) throat gu   gegir-mek “to be sick; to belch”   Š 106; Gost. 240; Sara 1994, p. 69 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    150 gomb,
    gam, um-dug4-ga   bog “button”   Š 362; 134, 11; Gost. 79, 80, 801; Sara 1994, p. 70  
    151 gond,
    to think
    gun   kaygı “worry, thought, reflection”
    qomï- “worry, think”
    T Š 108/1; 106/11; MSL III 152/367; Gost. 82; Sara 1994, p. 70  
    152 gödör pit kidar   gedik “crack, slit”   Gost. 661; Sara 1994, p. 71  
    153 gög
    gig, ge6, gu   gogus “breast”
    ulugsig “arrogance” lit., “megalomania”
      Š 427; 106; Gost. 49, 240; Sara 1994, p. 71 what “breast” has to do with “arrogance”?
    154 gomb,
    ball, sphere;
    round as a ball
    gam   kumbet “dome”   Š 362; Gost. 79; Sara 1994, p. 71  
    155 görbe
    crooked; curve
    to bend, to crook
    to bend
    gar-ba, gub-ba, gib   kırak “bent; curve”   Š 333; 88; 67; Gost. 126, 161, 162, 283, 416; Sara 1999, p. 49 Hu. gorbe ~ Eng. curve ~ Sl. gorb (ãîðá) ~ Lat. curvus
    156 guba farmer’s coat
    coarsely woven
    gubbu   kubat “coarse, crude”   Gost. 675; Sara 1994, p. 71  
    157 gulya (*th/dh > l) herd of cattle gud, gu4   qual “gray-yellow”   Š 297; MSL III 137/94; Gost. 721; Sara 1999, p. 49 Hu. gulya ~ Eng. great ~ Tr. ulu(g); what “herd” has to do with “yellow”?
    158 gumo tuber um-dug4-ga   gom-mek “to bury”   Š 134/11; Gost. 801; Sara 1994, pp. 71s.  
    159 gur-ul-ni to roll gur   gurulde-mek “to rattle, to clatter” T Š 111; Gost. 333; Sara 1994, p. 72 -ul- + -de- + -mek are not stems
    160 gyakori
    often, commonly
    to exercise
    dah (d>gy )   yekin-mek “to make an effort, to try hard”   Š 169; Gost. 408; Sara 1994, p. 72 -in- + -mek are not stems
    161 gyal-og,  (*j>gy)
    on foot
    to walk
    alaku (akk.), gug4   yol “way, walking”
    bar-/par-, yor-, yorï-, yürü-, man-, manla-, ogra-, sek- “walk”
     T Š 332; LM 66; Gost. 315, 316, 423; Sara 1994, p. 72 kling-klang?
    162 gyám guardian
    someone who is under protection of a guardian, like an orphan, ward
    geme = slave girl
    dam = wife
      ya-mak “helper” (i.e. yes-man)
    gostun, ilchibek, kushtan, taya “guardian”
      Š 554, 557; Gost. 439, 440; Sara 1994, p. 73  
    163 gyarap-ita-ni (v/t)
    gyarap-od-ni (v/i)
    to increase
    to increase, enrich
    dirig (d>gy)   yapkı “rich”, yapı-mak “to enrich o.s.”
    bedü-/beδü-, etik-, köpad-/köpaδ-, oglït-/oγlït-, qalïŋurt-, tuvra-, ulgad-/ulgart-/ulgaş-/ulgat-/ulugad-, üdrä-/üδrä-, ükli-, ükül-, üstä- “to increase”
      Š 123; Gost. 419; Sara 1994, p. 74 kling-klang?
    164 gyárta-ni to produce, manufacture gar, ga-ga   yarat “to create, to produce” T Š 597; Gost. 336; Sara 1999, p. 50  
    165 gyenge (*j>gy) weak dim-ma, gig   yeni “new”, yegni “easy”   Š 15; 446; Gost. 145, 149; Sara 1994, p. 74 what “new” and “easy” have to do with “weak”? kling-klang?
    166 gyep
    lawn, turf
    frontier (archaic)
    gaba = chest, frontier
      yaba “wet”   Š 85; Gost. 784; Sara 1994, p. 75 what “wet” has to do with “lawn”? kling-klang?
    167 gyér (djair) Seldom, rarely present dil   yıak “empty, thin”, yıa-mak “to decrease, to lose weight”
    az “seldom”
      Gost. 823; Sara 1994, p. 75 kling-klang?
    168 gyere, jer (imperative 2nd pers. of sg.) come gir   yuru-mek “to move, to go” T Š 444; Gost. 231; Sara 1994, p. 75 --mak/-mek is not a stem
    169 gyermek, gyerek dj~gy child um(-u)??, tur, dumu = child   yavru “rascal, young (animal). child”
    oglan, ogul “child”
      Š 134; Gost. 437; Sara 1994, p. 75 kling-klang?






    yarut- “to shine”, yaruk “light” (Uig.)
    kandil “candle”


    Š 256/1; Gost. 24; Sara 1999, p. 50


    171 gyilkol-ni,
    to kill to murder
    killer murderer
    dagger (kill is öl)
    gil   yı-mak “to knock over, to annihilate”   Gost. 488; Sara 1994, p. 75 kling-klang?
    172 gyors quick, fast guruš (gurush)   yor-dam “fastness, quickness” T Š 322/59; Gost. 505; Sara 1994, p. 75 -dam is not a stem
    173 gyökér root suh6   kok “root”   201/2; Gost. 589; Sara 1994, pp. 75s. kling-klang?
    174 gyözni,
    to win,
    winner, victor
    giš (gish) gišguza (gishguza) , isu   yuz “peak, top”   Š 296; 559; 296; Gost. 345, 510, 787; Sara 1994, p. 76 kling-klang?
    175 gyull-ad-ni
    to become inflamed,
    to ignite
    mul, mulu, ul-ul, gid(-da)   jalin “flame”   Š 129 a/31 a/c; 371; Gost. 47b, 361; Sara 1994, p. 76 kling-klang?
    176 hab foam a-ab-(ba)
    ab = sea
      kopuk “foam”   Š 579; Gost. 38; Sara 1994, p. 76  
    177 hágó (*kunge)
    path in the high mountains, climb up gag
    kun 4,5 = climb, stair, ladder
      ag-mak “to go up, to climb up” T Š 230; Gost. 582; Sara 1994, p. 77 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    178 hagy-ni to let, leave u-gu   goy-mak “to let, to leave” T Gost. 404; Sara 1994, p. 77 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    179 haj hair ka + u   kıl “hair” T Š 167; MSL 150/342; Gost. 220; Sara 1994, p. 77  
    180 hal fish ku6, ha   balık “fish”   Š 589; Gost. 730, 731; Sara 1994, p. 79  
    181 halad-ni to proceed?
    hul, hal bis = run, stream   ilerle-mek “to proceed” T Š 550; Gost. 99, 385; Sara 1994, p. 80 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    Mongol kölge
    182 hal-ál death lu-alal, hul   ol-mek “to die”
    öl- “to die”
    T Š 317-2, 6; 316; 456; Gost. 31, 98; Sara 1994, p. 79 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    183 halla-ni,
    to hear,
    to be listening;
    to be silent
    hal ?   kulak “ear”
    qulaq “ear”, ešid- “hear”
    T MSL III 128/367; Gost. 101; Sara 1994, p. 80  
    184 hál-ni
    to sleep, lay and rest
    shut the eye
    hal ?
    hung = repose, rest
    ku_ = lie down
      kalı-mak “to stay, to stand”   Š 2/4, 12, 13; Gost. 384; Sara 1994, p. 79 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    185 hal-ni to die hul   ol-mek “to die” T Š 456; Gost. 98; Sara 1994, p. 79  
    186 hamar quickly, hurried a-mar-u   hemen “now, immediately” T Gost. 824; Sara 1994, p. 80  
    187 hamu ashes ukum, kum-ma   kül “ashes” T Š 212; Gost. 198, 199; Sara 1994, p. 80  
    188 hangya (*kuńće) ant gan-ga? kiši7,8,9   karinca (karincha) “ant”
    qumursga “ant”
    T Gost. 750; Sara 1994, p. 81  
    189 harag (*k>g/h with backvowels) anger Urgu ?, gir10 = anger   hıgur “fight” T Š 22; Gost. 194; Sara 1994, p. 82  
    190 has (hash) belly haš (hash)   (ich) “inner part, belly, stomach” T Š 190; Gost. 248; Sara 1994, p. 82  
    191 has-ita-ni
    to split, split in two,
    haš (hash)   _eş-mek (eshmek) “to break apart” T Š 12; Gost. 270; Sara 1994, p. 82  
    192 hasz-on (hason) ,
    hasz-n-os (hasnosh)
    use, advantage,
    useful, profitable
    a-aš (a-ash)   _ası “advantage”, aslı “useful” T Gost. 144; Sara 1994, p. 83  
    193 hat “6” haš aš a-aš (hash ash a-ash)   altı “6” T Š 190; 598b; Gost. 248, 841; Sara 1994, p. 83 Rum. shasse = next runner-up
    194 hat back haš (hash) ??
    ngas = 6 (*t>s)
      köt “back; behind”   Š 190; Gost. 248; Sara 1999, p. 53 köt = Hu: hát
    195 határ, old hudur
    to mark off,
    to decide
    kud, bulug
    gud-uru = boundary stone
      hat “line, border” T Š 96; Gost. 272, 491; Sara 1994, p. 83  
    196 hat-ni to have effect kud   kat “strong”   Gost. 272; Sara 1994, p. 83  
    197 hattyu swan ka-ku(-a)-hu   kuğu “swan” *qotaŋ = stork, pelican (OT);
    quγu “swan” (kuu kus “white bird”), qordai “pelican”
    T Gost. 732; Sara 1994, p. 83  
    198 ház (*kota)
    one’s family, clan
    ni(ri-a) ?, ga = house
    kituš = dwelling, kues = tent
      kuš “tent, hut” (Kaz.)
    xos “living room” (Sakha)
      Š 339; 233; Gost. 446, 452; Sara 1994, p. 83 kling-klang?
    Uralic *kote = living space, tent, hut, house
    199 haz-ud-ni,
    to tell a lie,
    lier, fake
    u-zug   kazık “trick, ruse”
    al, hila, yap/yup, kür, tef/tev, ütrük “trick, ruse”
      Š 318/28; Gost. 502; Sara 1994, p. 83 kling-klang?
    200 hegy mountain gag   dag “mountain” T Š 230; Gost. 582; Sara 1994, p. 84 k/g/h <> d ?? Türkic has word that better matches Sumerian than this.
    201 hej! hey! ha,. he, hu   hay “hey!” T Gost. 825; Sara 1994, p. 84  
    202 hely,
    to put
    ki, ke, é   hal “situation, state”   Š 461; Gost. 40; Sara 1994, p. 84  
    203 hen-ger cylinder ki-gar   kangala-mak “to roll up”
    kasnak rulo “cylinder”
      Š 461; Gost. 620; Sara 1994, p. 85 kling-klang?
    204 hez, hoz, hoz
    (allative suffix)
      š, eš eš, uš, se (allative and terminative suffix)   oz “someone’s inner part, one-self”
    gä/kä/qa, qaru/gärü/γaru/kärü, gär/γar, ŋaru/ŋärü, -ðal-, ya, ra/rä (allative suffix)
      Gost. 858; Sara 1999, p. 56 kling-klang?
    205 hig thin, liquid diluted, rarefied liquid (not thin) ri-ba-na?   segrek “seldom” (i.e. rare) Š 86/58, 60; Gost. 41; Sara 1994, p. 86  
    206 hiv-ni
    to call,
    faithful(not same root)
    ku = utter a cry
      kigir-mak “to call”   Š152(4); MSL III 351; Gost. 518; Sara 1994, p. 87 kling-klang?
    207 hiz-lal-ni
    to fatten,
    to get fat
    he 2, he-gal, he-nun   hızı “pig” T? Š 143; Gost. 106; Sara 1994, pp. 87s.  ??
    208 hold, hod moon hul ?, id 4,8 = moon
    hud = shiny
      ot “fire, light”   Š 550; Gost. 88; Sara 1994, p. 88  
    209 hollo raven hu = bird, u-ga = raven   karga “raven, crow”   Š 78, 228; Gost. 754; Sara 1999, p. 55  
    210 hon homeland nu   hane “house”   Š 195/2; Gost. 482; Sara 1994, pp. 88s.  
    211 horog crook ha-bur-da, hur   arγaγ “crook” (OT)
    arga-mak “to turn”
      UET 351; Gost. 533a, 605; Sara 1994, p. 89  
    212 horzs-ol-ni (horjolni)
    to rub, scrape haš (hash), hara, ara, hur, ur = scape   hı, hor “to snore”   Š 12; Gost. 270; Sara 1994, p. 89 kling-klang?
    213 hosszu (hossu) long (ush)   uzun “long” T Š 211; Gost. 171; Sara 1994, p. 90  
    214 hő, hev heat he, he-gal, he-nun   kavur-mak “to roast”   Š 143; Gost. 106; Sara 1994, p. 90 kling-klang?
    215 hölgy lady, damsel, ermine ad, ad-da
    ge2-lum = fruitful girl??
      gelin “daughter-in-law”
    kadın, katyn, ebchi, evlig, evlüg, evlik, evlük, qïz, tishi, uragut, uzun “lady”
      Gost. 435; Sara 1994, p. 90  
    216 hulla-ni,
    to fall,
    hul   ol-mek “to die” T? Š 456; Gost. 98; Sara 1994, p. 91 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    217 huny-ni to turn a blind eye
    shut the eye
    hun, hung   kon-mak “to lie down, to sit down”   Š 536/39; Gost. 393; Sara 1994, p. 91 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    218 hur
    string, chord
    hur   siŋir “sinew, vein”
    ekčäk (ekchak) “vein”, tàìar/tamïr/tamur “sinew, vein”, özäk “jugular” ;
    dize “string”, akor, kiriş (kirish) “chord”, čevrim, devre, döngü “loop”
    T? Š 401; Gost. 605; Sara 1994, p. 91  
    219 hus (hush) meat (ush) uzu, kuš (kush)   guš (gush) “meat” (Persian)
    et “meat”
      Š 384; 171; MSL III 151; Š 7; Gost. 113, 203, 204; Sara 1994, p. 92 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. guš (gush) “meat” (Persian) is a borrowing
    220 huz-ni (*kute) to pull hur ?, gid   uzak “far, far away”, uzat-mak “to pull out”   LM 401; Gost. 398; Sara 1994, p. 92 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    221 hülye  (hewye) idiot lil   hileli “unmixed, dirty” (Arabic)
    endik, esiz/essïz, munduz, munqul, mürkï, qal, telvä, tümkä, uŋamug, uqussïz/uqussuz, yalgu “stupid”
      Š 336; Gost. 932; Sara 1994, p. 92 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. hileli “unmixed, dirty” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    222 hüs, hüv-ös *s>h
    sid   kış (kysh) “winter”   Gost. 66; Sara 1994, p. 92  
    223 idö time; weather ud, ud-(d)a, itu   od “time” (OT)
    odel “deadline”
    T Š 381; 52; Gost. 42, 44; Sara 1994, p. 92  
    224 ifju youth, junior ibila   yeni “new, young”   Š 144/37; MSL V 305; Gost. 456; Sara 1999, p 57 kling-klang?
    225 -ig (terminative case suffix) ig, ek?
    (no! -še)
      degin (terminative case postposition)
    -γalï (terminative case suffix)
    T Š 123; Gost. 561; Sara 1994, p. 93  
    226 igaz true igi
    zag = right, true
      ogu “good”
    bajiq, čïn, čïnlïq (n.), dürüst (n.), haqiqat (n.), kertu (n.), köni, könilik (n.), oŋ “true”
    T Š 449; Gost. 217; Sara 1994, p. 93  
    227 igen yes; very igi-in, igi-en ? gena = consent, šeg = agree   ogu “good” T Gost. 878; Sara 1994, p. 93 what “good” have to do with “yes” and “very”? kling-klang?
    228 igér-ni to promise igi   agıla-mak “to honor, to entertain, to offer”   Š 449; Gost. 217; Sara 1994, p. 93 -mak/-mek is not a stem; is “promise” = honor or entertain or offer? kling-klang?
    229 igy so, like that igi   öyle “so, like that”   Š 449; Gost. 217; Sara 1994, p. 93  
    230 íj, iv
    bow of a violin
    illu = bow,
    ban = bow,
    lu-illuru = archer
      yay “bow”  T Š 68-30; Gost. 551; Sara 1994, p. 93  
    231 ima
    to adore
    mu-mu, i   umit “hope” (Persian)   Š 152, 117, 118; Š 142; Gost. 15, 317; Sara 1994, p. 94 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. umit “hope” (Persian) is a borrowing
    232 ind-ul-ni, ind-ul-ni to depart, to start in-di, ud-du   onde “onward”
    bar- “depart”
    T Š 148/17, 52; 381; Gost. 140, 328; Sara 1994, p. 95  
    233 in-ger
    irritate, cause to anger
    gišimmar (gishimmar)??
    gir10 = anger
      sinir “nerve”, sinirlenmerk “to be nervous”   Š 356; Gost. 793; Sara 1994, p. 95 Where is “nerve” in gishimmar?
    234 in-ni,
    iszik (isik) , iv-
    to drink,
    im-ma   ič-mek (ichmek) “to drink”   Š 28; Gost. 319; Sara 1994, p. 97 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    235 iny, uny gums, palate inim,
    unu = cheek
      in “hollow, hole”   Š 15; 376; Gost. 76, 223; Sara 1994, p. 95 kling-klang?
    236 ipar
    industry, trade
    industrial, trader
    ibira   yap-mak “to make, to do”   Š 23/1; Gost. 484; Sara 1994, p. 95 yapmak is not generic, it is “to build” and the like
    237 ir balm, ointment i, ia, irig, ir, bappir   irivi “medication”   Š 231; 225; Gost. 556, 557, 718; Sara 1994, p. 96  
    238 ir-am-od-ni
    to flee, to escape
    speed up
    iri “to go”   ıgamnak “to move, to get going”
    kač-, kačın-, kürä-, sıvış-, terket-, tez-, tüy-, čık-, git- “flee”
      Š 232/4; Gost. 314; Sara 1994, p. 96  
    239 irigy jealous erim   irade “wish, desire” (Arabic)
    kıskanč, düşkün, titiz, özenli “jealous”
      Š 172; Gost. 195; Sara 1994, p. 96 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. irade “wish, desire” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    240 ismer-ni to know umuš (umush)   asna “pal, brother” (Persian)   Š 536/48; Gost. 111; Sara 1994, p. 97 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. asna “pal, brother” (Persian) is a borrowing
    241 is-ten “ancient-creator god šen, d-DIŠ (shen, d-DISH)   ısın “light”, ıstın “illuminating”, yezdan “god” (Persian), idi “sir, master” (OT)   Š 480; LM 480; Gost. 22, 23; Sara 1994, p. 97 Suggested Turk. yezdan “god” (Persian) is a borrowing; Hu. is-ten = Tr. eske Tengri?
    242 íz (iiz) taste igi-kak, ziz   meze “taste” (Persian)
    tadu, tatag/tatïg “taste”
      Š 449/122e; 339; Gost. 583, 809; Sara 1994, p. 97 Suggested Turk. meze “taste” (Persian) is a borrowing
    243 izz-ad-ni to sweat il, irig, ir   ılak “wet, watery”
    čila- (chila-), terit- “sweat”
    T Š 172; Gost. 450, 557; Sara 1994, p. 98  
    244 izza-ni,
    to glow,
    izi   ısı “warm, hot”, ısındır-mak “to warm up, to heat up”
    jarï-, jaru- “glow”
    T Š 172; MSL IV 36/99; Gost. 191, 450; Sara 1994, p. 98 kling-klang?
    245 jár-ni to go; to come gir, ir, har(-ra)(*j>ng/g)   yuru-mek “to go; to come” T Š 444; 232/4; 401; 152b, c; Gost. 231, 314, 606; Sara 1994, p. 98  
    246 jég ice šeg9 (sheg9)   yog “dense, solid”
    muz, buz “ice”
      Š 551; Gost. 64; Sara 1994, p. 99  
    247 jel sign i(-a)   yel “mane”
    im “sign”
    T Š 142; Gost. 13; Sara 1994, p. 99 kling-klang?
    i(-a), dug   iyi “good” T Š 142; 396; Gost. 13, 146; Sara 1994, p. 99  
    249 jog law
    rights under law
    i(-a), i   hak “law, truth” T Š 142; Gost. 13, 317; Sara 1999, p. 60  
    250 jön-ni, dial. gyünni to come gin, du (*j>ng/g)   yanas-mak “to come nearer, to come to there”
    teg- “come”
      Š 206; Gost. 255, 256; Sara 1994, p. 99 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    251 juh sheep u 8   ıh “howling”, ıhla-mak “to pant” “sheep”
    koyun “sheep”
      Š 494; Gost. 724; Sara 1994, p. 100  
    252 kabitani,
    to intoxicate,
    to be intoxicated
    maš (mash) hab   gabi “idiot; crazy”   Š 483/15; 511/12; Gost. 94, 704; Sara 1994, p. 100 kling-klang?
    253 kád tub dug   kadeh “mug, goblet” T Š 309; Gost. 539; Sara 1999, p. 60  
    254 kancso (kancho) ,
    gan, (giš)-gan (gishgan)   kanata “jug, can”
    kodes “jug, can”
    T Š 14/1; 367/15; Gost. 534; Sara 1999, p. 62  
    255 kany-ar,
    bend, curve,
    to fling, to hurl,
    to bend, to curve
    kun, kun4   kanır-mak (kanyrmak) “to bend” T Š 142; 144; Gost. 249, 464; Sara 1994, p. 101 -mak/-mek is not a stem; -ır active voice affix of intrans. verb base
    256 kapar-ni to scratch kaparu (akk.)   kıpır-da-mak “to move, kick, scrape” T Gost. 271; Sara 1994, p. 101 -mak/-mek is not a stem; -ır active voice affix of intrans. verb base, +da locative affix
    257 kap-ni
    to receive;
    to catch, grab
    ku, ka
    gab-sa = buyer,
    gab-zi = remover
      kap-mak “to catch” T Š 36; Gost. 351, 686; Sara 1994, p. 101 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    258 kar arm kal, kalg, kuš kur x   qary “arm” (OT),
    qar “arm” (OT)
    T Š 322; 74/58, 105; MSL III 78/4, 79/1, 7; Gost. 152, 205, 522; Sara 1999, p. 63  
    259 kár “damage; a pity” kur, kar ?
    kúr = hostile, strange
      kahır, khr “bitterness, remorse” (Arabic),
    karmaput “misdemeanor, misdeed”
    qarɣiš “curse”
    T Š 60; 376/2, 3, 4, 8, etc.; Gost. 122, 553; Sara 1994, p. 102 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. kahır, khr “bitterness, remorse” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    -ɣiš instr. affix
    250 kard saber, sword kar ?
    giri = knife, dagger,sword
      kart-mak “to cut into” (OT) T LM 223; Gost. 647; Sara 1999, p. 63 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    261 karika ring kur(-kur)   kure “ball, sphere” T Š 60; Gost. 105; Sara 1999, p. 63  
    262 karó stake, post kar bis   qary. “stake, post” (OChuv.) T Gost. 554; Sara 1999, pp. 53s.  
    263 kebel bosom, breast gab(a)   kabalı “swollenness, fullness” T Š 167; Gost. 202; Sara 1994, p. 102  
    264 kedv,
    to like
    ki-ag, ke-ag = love   keyif “high spirits” (Arabic)   Gost. 306; Sara 1994, p. 103 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. keyif “high spirits” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    265 kegy,
    gracious, merciful, caring-loving
    kug, ku-babbar, kug-dim   kıyama-mak “to regret, to pity, to spare” T Š 468; 41; Gost. 165, 572, 573; Sara 1994, p. 103 -mak/-mek is not a stem; -ma is a negation affix
    266 kéj
    helyes = atractive
    kul = sexually mature
    hili = attractive
      keyif “high spirits” (Arabic)   Š 461; Gost. 107; Sara 1994, p. 103 kling-klang? Suggested Turk. keyif “high spirits” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    267 kelengye dowry Ki-en-gi ?   kalin “bride”
    qalïŋ “payment for bride”
    T Gost. 490, 913; Sara 1994, p. 103  
    268 kelle-ni to must, need gal   kalı “insufficient”   Š 80; MSL III 176; Gost. 332; Sara 1994, p. 103 kling-klang?
    269 kel-ni
    to rise, to get up kur
    gal-am = climb
    zig = rise
      gelmek “to arrive”
    kur- “to erect, rise”
    T Gost. 428; Sara 1994, p. 103  
    260 kém spy geme   kemin “secret, lurking” (Arabic)   Š 554; Gost. 439; Sara 1994, p. 104 Suggested Turk. kemin “secret, lurking” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    271 kende, old kundu
    ancient title of dignity
    you polite
    kin-gal   kendi “you (polite form)” T MSL III 125; Gost. 523; Sara 1994, p. 104  
    272 kendö cloth, kerchief kandu (akk.)   kanat “wing; vastness”   Gost. 678; Sara 1994, p. 104 kling-klang?
    273 ker-ek,
    mul-gišgigir, gigir
    gur = circle, kára = encircle
      kure “globe, sphere, ball” T LM 129a; Gost. 142, 531; Sara 1994, p. 104  
    274 kert
    fence in, encircle
    kiri = garden
    kára = encircle
      kerte “sign, furrow”,
     kert-mek “to cut in, to mark”
      MSL I, 71; Gost. 663; Sara 1994, p. 105 kling-klang?
    275 ker-ül-ni to avoid; to come; to cost gur, kar bis   kıvrıl-mak “to turn o.s., to wriggle, to squirm”   Š 111; Gost. 333, 554; Sara 1994, p. 105  
    276 kés (kaish)
    cut apart
    Isu ?  ngiri = knife/sword
    guz = cut
      kes-mek “to cut”   Š 296; Gost. 787; Sara 1994, p. 105 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    277 keskeny narrow kaskal = road, caravan?   keskin “sharp”   Š 166; Gost. 53; Sara 1994, p. 105 kling-klang?
    278 kész (kahs),  (*-t>s)
    kész-ite-ni (kahsiteni),
    kész-ül-ni (kahsülni)
    to prepare (v/t), to make ready,
    to get ready
    katu, isu (akk.)   (ish-) “work”, işle-mek (ish-) “to work”   Š 70/32; Gost. 432, 787; Sara 1994, p. 106 kling-klang?
    279 kéve, kepe sheaf (heap) ka-pa-lu (akk.)   kıvır-mak “to turn, to wind”
    kep, kip, hep (Kirg., Sakha, Tuv.) “heap”; küme, kamara (Turkish, Bosn.) “heap”
    T Š 101/13; Gost. 643; Sara 1994, p. 106  
    280 kever-ni, kavar-ni,
    to stir he-he, ha-ha = mix   kıvır-mak “to turn, to turn around, to stir”  T Š 396; Gost. 383; Sara 1994, p. 102  
    281 ki,
    kinn, kint
    ki, ke
    ki-e = put out, kun = outlet
      kıy “end, border” T Š 461; Gost. 40; Sara 1994, p. 106  
    282 kiabál-ni to shout akkil   kıgır-mak “to call, to look for” T Š 92x/23; Gost. 118; Sara 1994, p. 106 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    283 kigyó, kijó snake gi4 = turn, return?   kay-mak “to slide, to slip, to glide”
    gilyan/jilan (Ogur/Oguz) “snake”
    T Š 376; Gost. 347; Sara 1994, p. 107  
    284 kin
    agony, pain
    kin, kig   xen “trouble, agony” (OChuv.) T Š 538/10; MSL III 271; Gost. 499, 937; Sara 1999, p. 66 need to check if common to other Turkic or Mongol.
    285 kincs (kinch) treasure guškin (gushkin) = gold   inci “pearl”
    kazna “treasure”
    T Š 468; Gost. 571; Sara 1994, p. 107  
    286 kiván-ni (*kima) to wish, desire kam   hava, heva “wish, longing” (Arabic)   Š 143; 406; Gost. 421; Sara 1994, p. 107 Suggested Turk. hava, heva “wish, longing” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    287 kocsag (kochag)
    kacsa (kacha)
    kassag   kuş (kush) “bird” T Gost. 743; Sara 1994, p. 107  
    288 korcs (korch) hybrid kuš kaš (kush kash)   kırıl-mak “to devastate, to annihilate”   Š 318/b; 214; Gost. 205, 719; Sara 1994, p. 109 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    289 korsó jug, mug (beer) kiri = large vessel/pot   kaşı (kashy) “spoon”   Š 46/4, 8; Gost. 542; Sara 1999, p. 67 kling-klang?
    290 kosár
    leather case/briefcase
    kis-ab “basket”, kus “bowl”
    dusu “type of basket”
      kiz “basket”  T Gost. 614; Sara 1999, p. 67  
    291 kö (követ),
    to pave, to stone
    kur, ku-ur,
    ku = metal ore
      kaya “boulder” (i.e. rock) T Š 366; 536; Gost. 121, 353; Sara 1999, p. 68  
    292 könny tear kan (?), gam = bend
    gaŋ “knee,joint”
      gonul “heart, feelings”   Š 119/2; Gost. 83; Sara 1994, p. 111  
    293 könnyü light, easy gin  = a small volume unit,
    gi17 = small
      kıyık “small, tiny”
    jenik/jeŋil (Oguz), genik/geŋil (Ogur) “light, easy”
    T Š 595; Gost. 545; Sara 1994, p. 111  
    294 köny-ök elbow kun, kun4   kemik “bone”   Š 142; 144; Gost. 249, 464; Sara 1994, p. 111 what “bone” has to do with “elbow”? kling-klang? Latin genicula
    295 könyv  (*k> v common) book inim, kin, kig, kimu
    Babilonian kunuku = stamp
    gunu = sings
      kuin “book roll” (Uig.) T Š 15; 538; LM 15; Gost. 76, 937, 938; Sara 1999, p. 68 Is Sum. “book” feasible?
    296 köp-ni to spit uh   kopuk “foam”, kopurmek “to foam, to slaver” T Gost. 757; Sara 1994, p. 111 -mak/-mek is not a stem; what “foam” has to do with “spit”? kling-klang?
    297 kör (*kere)
    kur(-kur), gur
    gi-gir = wheels, cart
      kure “globe, sphere, ball”
    tilgän “wheel”,
    köl- “to harness”, kölük “
    T Š 60/33; 111; Gost. 105, 333; Sara 1994, p. 111, 104 Tr. köl- > Celtic car- > Eng. car
    298 köszön-ni (kösönni),  (kösönteni) to greet, to welcome; to thank;
    to welcome
    guza?   ozen “caution, care”   Š 559; Gost. 510; Sara 1994, p. 112 kling-klang?
    299 köt-ni,
    to bind,
    to tie up
    kad, kat4,5,
    ki-š-ib (ki-sh-ib) ,
    kad, (kesha)
      kat-mak “to unite, to assemble” T? Š 354/b; MSL III 139; 132/26; Gost. 214, 252, 279, 281; Sara 1994, p. 112 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    300 köz, old kuzu,
    spot, place; community;
    kiš, keš giš (kish, kesh gish); ?
      kasık “loins”
    xuž (huj) “spot, place, distance”
    T Š 425; 296/2-6; Gost. 504, 786; Sara 1994, pp. 112s.  
    301 kusz-ni (kusni) to climb
    to creep, crawl
    kuš (kush)?   uzun “long”, uzan-mak “to reach”   Š 562/2; Gost. 738; Sara 1994, p. 113 kling-klang?
    302 külde-ni, to send kin, kig   it-mek “to bump into; to spur on”
    jibär “send
      Š 538/10; MSL III 271; Gost. 499, 937; Sara 1994, p. 114 kling-klang?
    303 kürt
    horn (music instrument), animals horn, ox kir?
    gur = ox (horned animal?)
      gur “sharp, high voice”, gıt “to breathe stertorously”
    qïza “horn (furnace, funnel)”
    T Š 424/5; Gost. 584; Sara 1994, p. 114 Eng. horn
    304 küszöb (küsöb) ,
    old kezob
    inbetween place
    kišb (kishb) , idib, i-dib   kose “corner, angle”   Š 314; 142; Gost. 532, 533, 886; Sara 1994, p. 114 kling-klang?  English cusp?
    305 küz-de-ni (*kise = race)
    to fight, race, struggle
    defeat, win
    keša (kesha)
    gaz 2 = defeat
      kız-mak “to warm up, to get hot”   Gost. 281; Sara 1994, p. 115 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    306 láb (lahb) leg, foot lah4   adı “step”
    adaq, aδaq, ajaq, ataq, azaq “leg, foot”
      Gost. 254; Sara 1994, p. 115 kling-klang?
    307 láng flame dingir Lamma
    lah = shine, dry
      yangı “fire”   SL 322/35d; Gost. 19; Sara 1994, p. 115 kling-klang?
    308 le-
    lent, lenn
    = kneel down
    lal, lá = lessen
      alt “lower part” T Š 481; Gost. 334; Sara 1994, p. 116  
    309 legény lad, young man laga(r) (< akk. lagaru)   yegen “cousin”   Š 458; Gost. 506; Sara 1994, p. 117 kling-klang?
    310 lél-ek,
    breathsoul (vs. bodysoul),
    to breathe,
    inspired, fiery, spirited
    lil, lu = breath, spirit, wind   ılık “warm”   Š 313; 330; Gost. 69, 447; Sara 1994, p. 117 kling-klang?
    311 lép spleen lipiš (lipish), inner organ   lüp “inner part”
    talaq “spleen”
      Š 106; Gost. 244; Sara 1994, p. 117  
    312 levente (auch EN)
    epee (kind of sword)
    banda, Lu-banda   levent “beautiful, handsome, pretty”   Š 144; Gost. 449, 906; Sara 1994, p. 118 kling-klang?, Hunnish liuente
    313 liszt (list) flour zid
    liš = morsel, crum+ zid
      lezzet “taste”   Š 536; Gost. 720; Sara 1994, p. 118 kling-klang?
    314 locs-ol-ni (locholni) to water, sprinkle luh, lah   loş (losh) “wet” T Š 321/3; Gost. 325; Sara 1994, p. 119  
    315 lök-ni
    to push, propel
    lah4 = propel, fling   ok “arrow”   Š 206/13, 16; Gost. 254, 326; Sara 1994, p. 119 kling-klang?
    316 mag, (*munker)
    seed, sperm, self
    mud, ma5, mu   magz “someone’s inner part, seed” (Persian)
    mäni “sperm, seed” (Arabic)
    uruɣ “grain, seed, kernel”
      Š 567/4; 81; 33/2; Gost. 243, 346, 400, 810; Sara 1994, p. 119 Suggested Turk. magz “someone’s inner part, seed” (Persian) is a borrowing; the Arabic loanword is not suitable either; kling-klang?
    317 mag-as,
    mag-aszt-os (magastosh)
    high, tall
    sublime, grand
    mah   agac “tree; wood”   Gost. 163; Sara 1994, p. 119 kling-klang?
    318 mámor,
    mamu(-da)   Turk. mahmur “drunk, intoxicated” T Š 342/75a; Gost. 127; Sara 1999, p. 75  
    319 már-ta-ni
    to dip
    mar = immerse
      eri-mek “to diminish, to melt”, eritmek “to weaken, to consume”,
    dip “bottom”, dip- (v.),
    man “immerse, dip”
    T Gost. 14, 658; Sara 1994, p. 120  
    320 más,
    the other one,
    to amend,
    to copy
    maš (mash) maš (mash) , -meš (mesh) , me-eš (me-esh), min = 2   baska “other, the other one” T Š 74; MSL VI 48, 55; Š 76; Gost. 12, 94a, 632, 727, 864; Sara 1994, p. 120  
    321 mász-ni (mahsni) to climb muš (mush)   as-mak “to hang up”   Š 374; Gost. 739; Sara 1994, p. 120 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    322 medence,
    basin, pelvis
    me   medar “middle” (Arabic) ??   Gost. 658; Sara 1994, p. 120 Suggested Turk. medar “middle” (Arabic) is a borrowing; kling-klang?
    323 mel-eg warm dingir Lamma, mu-lam, me-lam,
    mél = hot
      ılı, ılık “warm”
    büligen “warm” (Mongol, possible) 
      Š 322/35d; Gost. 19, 129; Sara 1994, p. 121  
    324 mély deep me, ma(-a), meli, nim   meyan “spot, place, middle of” (Persian)   Š 122; 433/9; Gost. 14, 568, 669, 777; Sara 1994, p. 121 Suggested Turk. meyan “spot, place, middle of” (Persian) is a borrowing; kling-klang ???
    325 mén
    (related )
    a horse herd
    nim ??   meni “sperm, semen”   Š 433; Gost. 164; Sara 1994, p. 121 Sumerians did not have horses; Turk. meni ~ Hu. mony
    326 men-ni to go gin = come and go,
    ma 3 = go
      mauy. “step”
    git/kit/ket (v.) = “go”
    T Š 206; Gost. 255, 267; Sara 1994, p. 121  
    327 menye
    mony = egg
    young woman/wife
    sometimes as wife
    munus = woman   yenge “sister-in-law; daughter-in-law”     kling-klang?
    328 menny
    heaven, sky, firmament, ceiling mun, nim-gir, nim   mina “azure (blue)” T Š 95; 433/16, 8; MSL III 151/354, 433/2, 9; Gost. 84, 90, 164, 401, 777; Sara 1994, p. 122 Old Mojenjo daro–Dravidian has this as “meen”, a symbol from homonym of “starts”
    329 mér-ni,
    to measure,
    me   ora-mak “to measure”   Š 532; Gost. 14, 492; Sara 1994, p. 122 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    Etruscan meru
    330 mez
    cover, clothes
    naked, unclad
    mú = cloth
    mu 4, mu-r = to dress
    mu-g 2 = naked
      bez “cloth, fabric”  T Š 532; Gost. 615; Sara 1994, p. 122  
    331 mezzö (*metsa) field, meadow
    (originally outer wetlands)
    ma-a, ma-da   mezraa “field, meadow” (Arabic)
    čümgän “wetland, meadow”
    T Š 342, 335; Gost. 503; Sara 1994, p. 123 Suggested Turk. mezraa “field, meadow” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    332 mi we me   biz “we” T Gost. 814; Sara 1994, p. 123  
    333 mi? what? mi,
    a-ba 11
      ne? “what?” T Š 70a; 61; Gost. 816, 818, 867; Sara 1994, p. 123  
    334 monda-ni, monda
    mond-ás  (*mane)
    saga (kind of legend)
    mu, me = speak, word, name   mani “folk song”, menkıe “legend” T Š 61; Gost. 301; Sara 1994, p. 123  
    335 mony egg; testicles mun, nunuz   maya “embryo” T Š 95; 394/6, 7; Gost. 84, 771; Sara 1994, p. 123  
    336 mosoly-og-ni to smile muš (mush) ??   ısı-mak “to shine, to light (up)”   Š 102, 103; Gost. 229; Sara 1994, p. 124 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    337 mul-ni to pass (time) mul, mulu   bul-mak “to be killed, to be lost; to reach”   Š 129a; Gost. 47a; Sara 1994, p. 124  
    338 munka,
    mùn-sub = shephard
      emek “work” T Š 95; Gost. 84; Sara 1994, p. 124  This is a Turkic word referring to suffering work or something like that.
    339 mü (muvet, mívet),
    müv-esz (muves)
    creation, art
    to function, to work
    to do, to make; to cultivate
    mu, me, um-mi-a, um-me-a, um-uš (um-ush)   mükevvenat “creation”, mükevvin “creator” T Š 61; 532; 134/25b, 31, 34; MSL V/13; Gost. 46, 492, 579, 580; Sara 1994, p. 124  
    340 nád reed ne-gi-gi-du16
    gi = reed
      ney “reed” (Persian) (Hindi nad)   Gost. 585; Sara 1994, p. 124 Suggested Turk. ney “reed” (Persian) is a borrowing
    341 nász (nas) wedding;
    nunuz = egg?
    nud = lie with,
      nisan “sign” (Persian), nisanlı“bride”
    egätlig, kelin“bride”
      Š 394/6, 7; Gost. 771; Sara 1994, p. 125 Suggested Turk. nisan “sign” (Persian) is a borrowing; kling-klang?
    342 nedv, nedü
    juice, moisture, wetness
    wet, moist
    nag   nem “juice, moisture, wetness” (Persian)
    mayi - “liquid, fluid” > moist - “watery, wet, damp”
    T Š 35; Gost. 318; Sara 1994, p. 125 Suggested Turk. nem “juice, moisture, wetness” (Persian) is a borrowing
    343 nem, ne (negative particle) no, not na-am, nu-am, nu, la-   –ma-, -me-, -mi-, -mu- (negative infix) T ŠL 79/8; Gost. 58, 876; Sara 1994, p. 125  
    344 nem, -lom
    sex, gender, formative
    -nam = type formative
    nam = high, nobleman
      nam “name, glory”
    atï “name”
      Š 79/9; Gost. 57; Sara 1994, p. 125  
    345 nép people, folk ni(ri-a), ni, na-ab   epi “enough (people)”   Š 339; 366/7; Gost. 446, 812, 930; Sara 1994, p. 125 kling-klang? (See Parthian nef = folk)
    346 név  (*m>v *nime) name mu   nam “name” (Persian)
    atï “name”
      Š 61; Gost. 46; Sara 1994, p. 125 Suggested Turk. nam “name” (Persian) is a borrowing. Probably linked to nobility.
    347 néz-ni to see, to watch ni, ne   nazı omak “to be careful” (Arabic)   Š 399; Gost. 138, 848; Sara 1994, p. 126 Suggested Turk. nazı omak “to be careful” (Arabic) is a borrowing; kling-klang?
    348 woman nu, nunuz   nine “mother” T Š 75/1, 19, 81, 90; Gost. 470, 771; Sara 1994, p. 126  Chinese also has nü
    349 nö-ni, növ-
    to grow
    to increase, to augment
    na-na(-am), nu5, nunuz   on (OT), osmek “to grow” T Š 72; Gost. 387, 700, 771; Sara 1994, p. 126  
    350 nyak
    gu (neck, but also linked to shoulder) gun = neck, nape   yaka “collar”
    bojïn, bojun “neck
      Gost. 240; Sara 1994, p. 126 kling-klang?
    351 nyaláb bundle lagab   jal “bank of a river, shore of the sea”   Š 483/41; Gost. 708; Sara 1994, p. 127 kling-klang?
    352 nyél, nye,
    nyélgyártó, ách
    handle, shaft
    ne, nagar, na-an-gar, (ne)gi-gi-du16   el “hand, handle” (i.e. “forearm”   Š 444/7; 560; Gost. 549, 550, 585; Sara 1994, p. 128 kling-klang?
    353 nyel-ni
    nyelv  (*ñal-ema m>v)
    to swallow,
    tongue; language
    eme   yalmar-mak “to swallow”
    jut-, yut- “to swallow”
      Š 32; Gost. 227; Sara 1994, p. 128 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    354 nyereg saddle nir   eyer “saddle” T Š 325/1-10; Gost. 425; Sara 1994, p. 128  
    355 nyer-ni to win nir   yar-mak “to divide, to split, to cut apart”
    jeŋ-, ut- “to win
      Š 325/1-10; Gost. 425; Sara 1994, p. 128 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    356 nyom,
    trace, track
    to press
    gum (ñ> ŋ/g), _um-un
      yum-mak “to close”
    kiritlä-, ört-, tu- “close, cover”
    T Š 79; MSL III 101/65, IV 125ss. ; Gost. 59; Sara 1994, p. 129 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    357 nyug-od-ni, nyugszik (nyugsik),
    to rest,
    west (sunset)
    nud, nad, na   uyu-mak “to rest, to sleep”   Š 431; Gost. 411; Sara 1994, p. 130 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    358 nyug? load, burden nig   yuk “load, burden”   Š 597; Gost. 74; Sara 1994, p. 130  
    359 okos (*kače) bright, clever Ukuš,
    gaš-šu, zu
      akı “bright, clever” T Š Gost. 911; Sara 1999, pp. 81s.  
    360 or-, orv- wild ur-mah   ugrula-mak “to steal”
    bujmul, keδik, kejik, kejlig, mujmul, yaba, yïrtuč “wild”
    T Gost. 735; Sara 1994, p. 133 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    361 ordita-ni
    ordas = a wolf
    to roar, to howl ara9   uru-mek “to roar, to howl”
    àŋïla-, baqïr-, bozla-, čarla- , eŋrä- , etina-, kökra-, maŋra-, müŋrä- “to roar, to howl”
      Š 24; Gost. 287; Sara 1994, p. 132 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    362 orr (*kwore = peak,mtn) nose ur, ur-sag?? = peak, mtn, kiri = snout,nose   burun “nose” T Š 575/3; III 132/6; Gost. 481, 734; Sara 1994, p. 133  
    363 ország (orsag) , old uru-zag land, state zag, uru + zag, hursag, harsag   ırk, uruk “nation, sort, lineage”   Š 332/19; 38; 332; 401; Gost. 81, 478, 480; Sara 1994, p. 133  
    364 ostor (oshtor) whip ašar (ashar)   estirmek “to drive (on), to urge (on)” T Š 334/60; Gost. 595; Sara 1994, p. 133 -mak/-mek is not a stem, see Persian ochtere
    365 ott
    -t, -tt
    locative suffix
    -ta11 = locative suffix   otede “there, farther away”
    anda, anča, anta “there”, ïnaru, naru “there, farther away”
    locative affix
    T Gost. 857; Sara 1994, p. 134  
    366 öböl
    hollow, cavity
    ub = bay?, ab = sea
    ub 4 = cavity
      ablak “chubby (in the face)”
    liman, tamɣa “bay (cove)”
      Š 420; Gost. 55, 722; Sara 1994, p. 134 kling-klang?




    a-kal, kal, kalg


    oklun-mak “to press together”
    yuδruq “fist”


    Š 334; 322; Gost. 125, 152; Sara 1994, p. 134

    -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?

    368 öl-ni to kill ul7, bad = kill   öl-mek “to die
    T Š 354; Gost. 371; Sara 1994, p. 135  
    369 önte-ni, old omonteni
    (*ung = river wetlands)
    to pour Umun
    a-ngar = irrigator
      don-mek “to turn around, to fall”, dondur-mek “to turn away, to turn around”
    aq-, tök- “to pour, flow”
      Gost. 343; Sara 1994, p. 135 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    370 ör
    ör-szem (orsem)
    guarding place
    to guard
    guarding watch
    ur-in, ur = a guard
    ur5-uš gal, uru, erim, ur
      ort-mek “to cover”
    kü-, küdäz-, qara-, qorï- “to guard”
    T Š 401/99; 80; MSL III 176; Š 331; 393; 575/2, 3; Gost. 33, 332, 395, 494, 734; Sara 1994, p. 135 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    371 ördög
    angry spirit
    u-dug4 = a demon, pittfal
    galla = demon
      ort “fire”, orta-mak “to ignite” (OT)
    madar, raksas, raksaz, šamnu, šimnu, šumnu, šumnü “devil”
      Š 577; Gost. 2; Sara 1994, p. 135 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    ördög is believed to be from shörte?
    372 öreg,
    heritage, inheritance
    egir?   arık “thin, old”, arık-mak “to get tired”
    eski, qarï, ulug, uluq “old”
    T MSL VI 59/99; 209; Gost. 197, 247; Sara 1994, pp. 135s.  
    373 örül-ni,
    to enjoy
    ar, uru   uor “to enjoy” (Sakha) T Š 451; 56; Gost. 284, 396; Sara 1994, p. 136  The Manicheistic literature mentions the goddess Joy as Ram-ratuk??, Mani was Parthian
    374 örvény maelstrom uru   girdap “maelstrom”
    egrïm, egrimlan- “maelstrom”
      Š 456; Gost. 97; Sara 1999, p. 84  
    375 ös, üs, is (ösh, üsh, ish) ancestor uš2 (ush2) , š (ash)   esi “older male sibling” T Š 69; 480; Gost. 112, 835; Sara 1994, p. 136  
    376 össze (össe) together ušsa (ushsa) , eš (esh)   oz “heart, soul, oneself”, Turk. oz “inner part, marrow”
    alquɣun “together”
      Š 211; Gost. 827, 865; Sara 1994, p. 136 kling-klang?
    377 öv sash, belt ub, ab   evirmek “to buckle on”
    bel “belt
      Š 420; Gost. 55, 722; Sara 1994, p. 137  Japanese obi
    378 özön
    flood, torrent
    to get soaking wet
    ezen   az-mak “stream, currency”
    jad-. jaδ-, jaj-, jaj-, jas-, jat-, jaz- “to flood”
    T Š 152/2; Gost. 4; Sara 1994, p. 137 -mak/-mek is not a stem; it is a verbal infinitive affix; the word can't be translated as a noun; azmak meanings: go astray, run wild, overflow, frolic, become unmanageable, all kling-klang
    379 özvegy widower, widow ušbar (ushbar)   ozge “separate, single, independent”
    tuɣsaq, tul “widower, widow”
      Š 181/3; 185/3; MSL V 276; Gost. 459; Sara 1994, p. 137 kling-klang?
    380 pamut cotton mug   pamuk “cotton” T Š 3; Gost. 616; addition by A. Toth  
    381 patak brook pa   patak “hitting, beating”
    arïq, ögän, tamɣa, terŋüê, terŋäk, terŋük, yul. yulaq, yül, yülaq “brook”
      Gost. 656; Sara 1994, p. 137 kling-klang?
    382 Pereg-ni to spin (round) balag (r/l common)   bur-mak “to turn, to spin round, to screw”
    bur-, čevür-, čevrïl, čevrül-, ebir-, egir-, evir-, evür-, tezgin-, ǯüvrün-, “to spin”
    T Š 352a; Gost. 588; Sara 1994, p. 138 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    383 pir-os,
    to roast, toast
    si4   pişir-mek “to roast”; kırmız “red” Ò Š 113; Gost. 177; Sara 1994, p. 139 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    384 por dust par, za-par
    par-im = arid land
      bor “deposit, sediment” T Š 381; Gost. 706; Sara 1994, p. 140  
    385 potty-an-ni,
    to thud, to plop,
    to thud, to plop
    peš (pesh)   bat-mak “to fall down, to sink”
    bat- “to sink, submerge”
    T Š 346/1; Gost. 758; Sara 1999, p. 87 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    386 ra- onto top of (verbal prefix) -ra   rah, reh “way”
    -ra, -re locative affix
    T Gost. 852; Sara 1994, p. 140  
    387 rab prisoner rab   oγry “robber, thief”
    bulun “prisoner”
      Š 49/3, 4; Gost. 619; Sara 1999, p. 88 kling-klang?
    388 ragy-og-ni to shine rug, lag-lag   aydı “shining”   Š 381/67, 76; Gost. 183, 373; Sara 1994, p. 141 Persian raocha
    389 rak-ni
    to stack, place
    to load
    storage depot
    ra (+ ag)
    a-rah = storage house
    ang-rig = steward
      aktar-mak “to change place”   Gost. 264, 344, 369; Sara 1994, p. 141 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    390 ráz-ni to shake ra (+ uš)
    ra = stir
      rase “shaking, trembling” T Š 206; Gost. 263; Sara 1994, p. 141  
    391 regg-el,
    hol-nap  (*kudhe)
    tomorow (from morning)
    lag-lag (l/r common)
    húd = morning
      erken “early; morning”   Š 381/67, 76; Gost. 373; Sara 1994, p. 141  
    392 rejte-ni to hide ri, re   ort-mek “to close” T Š 86; Gost. 294; Sara 1994, p. 141 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    393 rend order, retinue rin(+ du)   ret “order” ??
    ämr, bučur-, bujur-, emr, jar1ïɣ, ǯarlïɣ, ǯarluɣ “order, to order”
    T Š 393/3; Gost. 75; Sara 1999, p. 89  Aha another Turkism in English
    394 rés (raihsh) crack, slit liš (lish)   es-mek “to hollow out, to dig out”   Š 377/3; Gost. 85; Sara 1994, p. 142 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    395 rész (réihs) part liš (lish)   az “small” T Š 377/3; Gost. 85; Sara 1994, p. 142  
    396 ringa-ni to swing, to rock rin(+ du)   ırgan-mak “to move, to swing, to rock” T Š 393/3; Gost. 75; Sara 1994, p. 143 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    397 rög clod lug-ud, lag, lagab (r/l)   ogun “part, piece” T Š 483/36, 56; 314; MSL III 239; Š 483; Gost. 174, 707, 800; Sara 1994, p. 144  
    398 rossz (roshs) bad gum, hum, huš ruš (hush rush)   bozuk “bad”   LM 565; Š 402/1; Gost. 135, 158; Sara 1994, p. 143  
    399 rug-ni to kick s.o ru5, ri, re, ra   raks “dance”   Š 441; 86; Gost. 259, 294, 344, 418; Sara 1999, p. 91 what “dance” has to do with “kick”? kling-klang?
    400 ság, seg, ség hill (in place names) šag (shag)   sağ (sa) “whole, complete”; säŋir “foothills” (OT);
    bel, kotkï, uδu, üjük, baqu “hill”
      Gost. 924; Sara 1999, p. 94 kling-klang?
    401 sanyar-gat-ni ,
    to torture,
    to get tortured
    šal(-šal) (shal(-shal))   yanıla-mak “to err, to grieve, to regret”
    eziyet-, işkence- “to torture”
      Š 231; Gost. 357; Sara 1994, p. 145 kling-klang?
    402 sár dirt, mud sahar = dust, dirt, 
    ze = dirt,
    šar-ag = dry out
      šor (shor) “dirt, mud” (Chuv.) T Š 212; Gost. 60; Sara 1999, p. 92  
    403 sárga yellow sig7   sarı “yellow” T MSL III 127/362; Gost. 176; Sara 1999, p. 92  
    404 seg-ite-ni
    to help
    apprentice, helper
    šag = head, worker,person
    saŋ-sig = to take care of
      ček-mek (chekmek) “to pull, to pull out”
    sïɣïn “ask for help”
    T Š 356; 454; Gost. 331; Sara 1994, p. 146 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    405 sej! hey! ši, ša (shi, sha)   čağır-mak “to howl”
    čaɣ “shout, cry”
    T Gost. 870; Sara 1994, p. 146 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    406 sekély shallow sig “low”   siğ “shallow” T Š 692; Gost. 147; Sara 1994, p. 146  
    407 sereg army šar, šargeš (shar, shargesh)   čeri (cheri) “army” T Š 396/15; Gost. 512, 513; Sara 1999, p. 94  
    408 seregély starling (bird) šir-bur, šir-aš šir-ga-mušn (shir-bur, shir-ash shir-ga-mushn)   sıgırčık (sıgırchık) T Gost. 766; Sára 1999, p. 94 -chık is a diminutive affix
    409 sér-te-ni,
    “to hurt; to insult,
    to hurt o.s.
    sir   sert “hard, sharp, severe” T Š 371/10; Gost. 389; Sara 1994, p. 147  
    410 sertés,
    serte, sörte
    šah (shah)
    šigga = a bore
      sert “hard, sharp, severe”
    sïrt “bristle”
    T   kling-klang?
    411 siet-ni to hurry ši-ed, ši (shi-ed, shi)   sitap “hurry” (Persian)
    šaš- (shash-) “to fuss, hurry”
    T Š 449, 381; Gost. 427, 871; Sara 1994, p. 147 Suggested Turk. sitap “hurry” (Persian) is a borrowing


    sik (sheik)

    even, flat



    yıa-mak “to wash, to rinse”
    alaŋ, jadïɣlïɣ, jalbï , jasɣač, jasɣaɣ, jasï, jasul, jüsaŋ, tüz, üsaŋ “even, flat”


    ŠL 692; Gost. 147; Sára 1994, p. 147


    413 silány bad?, poor quality, badly made sila   cılız “weak”, cılık “bad, spoiled”
    alïɣ, anïɣ, bäd, bat, jabïz, jablaq, jafuz, jaman, javïz, javlaq, javuz, qara, tas “bad”
    T Gost. 725; Sara 1994, p. 147  
    414 síp, (ship)
    zib, sip, šip,
    šeib (ship, sheib)
      čig (chig) “cry, shout, scream”
    sïqïr- “whistle”, from sïq- “squeeze”
    T Š 395; Gost. 543; Sara 1994, p. 148 -ir is active voice affix
    415 sir-ni (shirni) to cry zur bis, sir, še8 (she8)
    a-se-er = cry; šir,_ér,_ír, ri = cry
      čig (chig) “crying, lamentation” T Š 437/6, 12, 9; 152/3; LM 544, 541; Gost. 375, 390, 412; Sara 1994, p. 148  
    416 sisak helmet si   şiş (shish) “spear, sword”
    ašuq (ashug) , jïsïr “many, much”
    T Š 112; 441; MSL III 175; Gost. 767; Sara 1994, p. 148 kling-klang?
    Dravidian sisaku = helmet
    417 sok many, much su   čok (chok) “many, much” T Š 7, 2, 3, 17; Gost. 461; Sara 1994, p. 148  
    418 solyom falcon šur-du-(mušen) (shur-du-mushen)   sahin “falcon”
    bujmul, čaɣrï, čavlï, kekük, lačïn, quš, sahin, soŋqur, šuŋqar, toɣan “falcon”
    T LM 329; Š 126/31; Gost. 772; Sara 1994, p. 149  
    419 sor,
    to class, to classify
    sar   sıra “row, line” T Š 152; Gost. 313; Sara 1994, p. 149  
    420 sör, ser beer še-a (she-a)   sera “beer” (Chuv.) T Gost. 692; Sara 1999, pp. 95s.  
    421 sötét dark šu (shu)   setir “darkening” T Š 545/126; 545/2; Gost. 117; Sara 1994, p. 149  
    422 sujta-ni (shuytani) to hit, to beat,
    strike down
    šu...ti, šu4
    šu-ud < > ud-šu
      suh “fast, hasty” (as Hu: siet, not this)   Š 354; 411; Gost. 337, 338; Sara 1994, p. 149 kling-klang?
    423 sülly-ed-ni (shüyedni) to sink su-su
    = to drown, sink
      yuklen-mek “to sink”
    saplan- “to sink”
    T Gost. 894; Sara 1994, p. 150 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    424 sürü dense, thicket sir 2 = dense   čürük (chürük) “rotten”
    sık “dense”
    T Gost. 185; Sara 1994, p. 150 kling-klang?
    425 szab-ni (sabni) to cut out, to tailor to šab (shab)   sepi “to tan”   Š 295k; Gost. 273a; Sara 1994, p. 151 kling-klang?
    426 száj (sahy) mouth su, sa4   agız “mouth”   Š 82/3; Gost. 221, 311; Sara 1994, p. 151 kling-klang?
    427 szak-ita-ni (sakitani),
    szak-ad-ni (sakadni)
    to tear (v/t), to pick,
    to tear (v/i)
    suh   sökmek “to pull out, to tear out” T Š 102; Gost. 323; Sara 1994, p. 151 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    English section, segment
    428 szál (sal) thread sa-a   sač (sach) “thread” T MSL III 185; Gost. 529; Sara 1994, p. 152 Eng. suture
    429 száll-ni (sallni)
    *tul- = wing (t>s)
    *ase = settle for the night.
    to fly;
    to stay (in a hotel) (unrelated stems)
    dal   salan-mak “to float, to glide, to swing, to rock”
    uč- (uch) “fly”
      Š 86/41; Gost. 386; Sara 1994, p. 152 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    430 szám (sam),
    szám-ol-ni (samolni)
    to calculate
    šam (sham??) to do with the cost of something   san “number” T Š 187; MSL III 201; V 31, 217; Gost. 563; Sara 1999, p. 98  
    431 szán-ni (sahnni) to dedicate sum, sun   sona “to dedicate” (Chuv.) T Š 164; Gost. 377; Sara 1999, p. 98  
    432 szánta-ni (sahntani) to plow sun   sıdı-mak “to break in pieces, to smash”
    axtar, aɣtar-, sabanla “plow”
      Gost. 641; Sara 1994, p. 152 -mak/-maq/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    433 szapor-od-ni (saporodni)
    to reproduce, proliferate
    fast (as in a dance)
    su   sabuk “fast”, sapymaq “to move” (OT)
    čogal- (chogal-) “to reproduce”
      Š 7, 2, 3, 17; Gost. 461; Sara 1999, p. 98 kling-klang?
    434 szarv (sarv) ,
    szaru (saru)
    szarvas (sarvas)
    horn (animal),
    si = horn   sur “horn (animal)” T Š 112, 441; MSL III 175; Gost. 767; Sara 1999, p. 99  
    435 szed-ni (sedni) to pick (fruit, etc.) zag, šita5   sečmek “to choose” T Š 332/19; 314-17; Gost. 81, 406, 560; Sara 1994, p. 153  
    436 széd-ül-ni (sahdulni),
    széd-ül-et (sahdulet)
    to be dizzy,
    sud, sud(-da)   sendele-mek “to stagger, to totter” T Š 373; Gost. 179, 820; Sara 1994, p. 154 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    437 szeg (seg) nail, corner sag, šag (shag)   sık-mak “to press together”   Gost. 210; Sara 1999, p. 100 Hu. szük = tight ~ Tr. sık-mak “to press together”;  kling-klang?
    438 szeg (seg) ,
    szög (sög),
    szeg-es (seges),
    szeg-ély (segahy),
    szeg-ni (segni) ,
    szeg-let (seglet),
    szög-let (söglet),
    szeg-öd-ni (segodni)
    corner, angle,
    rim, border,
    corner, angle,
    old “to hem; to cut in; to break one’s word”,
    to serve; to join
    zag, zig, sig4, siga, si-gi4-da, sag   sok-mek “to take apart, to break out” T Š 332/19; 84; 567; UET 333, 361; MSL V 234; Gost. 81, 321, 546, 596b, 629; Sara 1994, p. 154 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    439 szeged (a city name),
    sziget (siget)
    An iland city in Hu
    sag-ud-da   sıg “low, shallow; sandbank” T Gost. 928; Sara 1994, p. 156  
    440 szegény (segañ) poor sig   ıgın “poverty” T Š 692; Gost. 147; Sara 1994, p. 154  
    441 szegy (segy) ,
    szugy (sugy)
    brisket šag   sudde “door, threshold, sandbank” (Arabic)
    döş, gögüs “brisket”
      Š 384; MSL III 134; Gost. 209; Sara 1994, p. 161 Suggested Turk. sudde “door, threshold, sandbank” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    442 szégyen (sahgyen) ,
    szégyen-kez-ni (sahgyenkezni) , szégyelleni (sahgyelleni)
    to be ashamed
    sikil, ki-sikil   seyn “shame”
    ajmanč, ejmänč, jačan, seyn, turquɣ, ubut, uvut “shame”
    T Š 461; Gost. 148; Sara 1994, p. 154  
    443 szekér (sekair) handcart
    chariot, wagon
    mul-giš-gigir (mul-gish-gigir) , gigir = chariot   sygyr “cow, bull” (OT) (for this etymology cf. Sara 1999, p. 100)
    čekček (chekchek) “ handcart”
      LM 129a; Š 486; Gost. 142, 531; Sara 1999, p. 100 kling-klang?  English car from Celtic!
    444 szél (sel) ,
    szél-es (seles)
    border, edge
    wide, broad
    sal-la, sal, sil, sila   sal-mak “to stretch out”   Gost. 143, 180, 497; Sara 1994, p. 154 -mak/-mek is not a stem; what “stretch out” has to do with “border, edge wide, broad”?
    445 szel-id (selid) tame, peacefull zid-(da)   selam “piece, rest” (Arabic)   Gost. 159; Sara 1994, p. 155 Suggested Turk. selam “piece, rest” (Arabic) is a borrowing
    446 szel-ni (selni),
    szel-et (selet)
    to cut off,
    sil   čel-mek “to hit, to cut, to cut off” T Š 12; Gost. 269; Sara 1994, p. 154  
    447 szem (sem) (*sil-ma) eye
    probably also to see once
    ši, še = to see
    sem = eye in Akkadican
      sin “pit, deepening
    ög- “to eye, penetrate, perceive”
      Š 449; 367; Gost. 218, 691; Sara 1994, p. 155  
    448 szende (sende) ,
    szend-er-ul-ni (senderulni)
    soft, gentle,
    to fall asleep; to pass away
    sanga, zid-(da)   sade “simple, clean, naive”   Š 314; Gost. 29, 159; Sara 1994, p. 155 kling-klang?
    449 szép (sep) beautiful, handsome, pretty sanga, zid-(da)
    šuba 2,3 ~ šub_ 7 = pretty
      sebze “green”   MSL III 127, 361; Gost. 175; Sara 1994, p. 155 what “green” has to do with “beautiful”?
    450 szep-eg-ni (sepegni) to act timidly
    about to cry
    sub   sepmek “to suck in, to pull in, to swallow, to drink”
    ajmanč, ejmänč, jačan, turquɣ, ubut, uvut “timid”
      Š 26; Gost. 376; Sara 1994, p. 155 kling-klang?
    451 szer (ser) ,
    szer-el-ni (serelni) ,
    sze-ez-ni (serezni,
    szer-szám (ser-szám)
    means, ceremony
    to mount, to install,
    to acquire,
    si-sa, šr, esir   sırık “stick, pole”   Š 112; 152; 57; Gost. 378, 414, 498; Sara 1994, p. 156 kling-klang?
    452 szer (ser) , szor (sor) -times še   sıra “row, order”   Gost. 891; Sara 1994, p. 156 kling-klang?
    453 szer-et-ni (seretni) ,
    szere-lem (serelem)
    to love,
    sil 5,6 = pleasure
      sar-mak “to embrace, to hug” T Š 437/3; Gost. 374; Sara 1994, p. 156 -mak/-mek is not a stem;
    454 szesz (sesz) mind ?;
    ziz   sis “fog”   Š 339; Gost. 809; Sara 1994, p. 156 kling-klang?
    455 szét- (saht-) apart (verbal prefix) sud, sud(-da)   sal-mak “to stretch out”   Š 373; Gost. 179, 820; Sara 1994, p. 156 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    456 szigoru (sigoru) severe, strict si-gar   sıkı “hard, rough”
    aɣïr, jarp, qataɣ, ɣatϊɣ, qadïɣ, qadaɣ, qattïh, xatϊɣ “severe”
    T Š 112/148; Gost. 577; Sara 1994, p. 157  
    457 szij (sij) strap, belt a-si, si   zıh “rope, cord”
    ïsïɣ/yïsïɣ “rope”
    T Š 112, 441; MSL III 175; Gost. 636, 767; Sara 1994, p. 157  
    458 szikk-ad-ni (sikkadni)
    to dry out
    sig   ısı “warm, hot”   Gost. 662; Sara 1994, p. 157 kling-klang?
    459 szilaj (silaj) impetuous,
    very tough/durable
    sila   yelli “windy” (that’s like Hu: szél = wind)   Gost. 725; Sara 1994, p. 157 kling-klang?
    460 szin (sin) color si4 = red?   sır “glaze, enamel”
    boduɣ, boδuɣ “color”
      Š 113; Gost. 177; Sara 1994, p. 158 kling-klang?
    461 szirt (sirt) rock, boulder si   sırt “back, backside of a mountain” T Š 112, 441; MSL III 175; Gost. 767; Sara 1999, p. 102  
    462 sziv (siv)
    heart, suck
    chest of an animal
    šag, šab (shag, shab) w>b   yurek “heart”; sepmek “to suck”
    chäre “heart”
    T Š 71; 384; MSL III 134; Gost. 51, 209; Sara 1994, p. 158 kling-klang?
    463 szó (so) word sa4, zu   soz “word, speech” T Š 82/3; 6; Gost. 311, 312; Sara 1994, p. 159  
    464 soba (soba) room su   soba “fire place”   Š 7; Gost. 683; Sara 1994, p. 159 kling-klang?
    465 szok-ni (sokni)
    to get used to s.th
    a custom, a way
    zah, su   sık “often”
    avïnč, ögrajük, ögratig, ögrütig “habit, habituate”
      Š 172; Š 7, 2, 3, 17; Gost. 310, 461; Sara 1994, p. 159  
    466 szomju (somyu) thirsty šumu (akk.)   susa-mak “to be thirsty”
    suvsalaq, suvsalïq, usaɣ “thirst”, azlan-, qïndur-, susa-, suvsa- “thirsty”
    T Gost. 320; Sara 1994, p. 159 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    467 szop-ni (sopn) to suck, suckle su, su-ub   sepmek “to suck”
    åm-, sor- “suck”
    T Š 7, 2, 3, 17; Gost. 461; Sara 1994, p. 159  
    468 szor-ita-ni (soritani),
    szor-ul-ni (sorulni )
    to squeeze
    to jam; to need s.th.
    sur   sırıt-mak “to snarl”
    bas-, erkla-, janč-, jenč-, jenči-, qïs-, sïq- “press” ???
    T Š 101, 2, 3, 7; Gost. 307; Sara 1994, p. 160 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    469 szor-ni (sorni) to scatter su-u   savur “to scatter” (Chag.)
    sač-, sačïs-, sečis- “to scatter”
    T MSL III 106, 121; Gost. 282; Sara 1999, p. 103  
    470 szö (sö , szöv- (sov-),
    szöv-eg (söveg),
    szöv-et (sövet)
    to weave,
    tissue, cloth
    sa   tüy, yün “hair”
    bürčak, jabaqu, jin, pürčäk, sač, sak, saq, tüg “hair
    T ŠL 104/7; Gost. 528; Sára 1994, p. 160  
    471 szörny (sörñ) monster ušum(-gal/-bašmu)   uru-mek “to howl”
    madar, raksas, raksaz, šimnu, šumnu, šumnü “monster”
    T Š 11; Gost. 741; Sara 1994, p. 160 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    472 szúr-ni (surni) to sting, to stab, prick sur, zar, esir   zuz-mek “to stab through” (r ~ z) T Š 101; 491; 57; 405/3, 4; Gost. 307, 368, 498, 748; Sara 1994, p. 161 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    473 szur-ok (surok) pitch, tar e-sir 2 = pitch,bitumen   sır “light; glaze”
    saɣïz, surqač, surquč, toɣraɣu “pitch (tar)”
    T Š 57; Gost. 498; Sara 1994, p. 161  
    474 szük (sük),
    szük-ös (sukos)
    narrow, scanty, small,
    narrow, scanty, small
    sig   sıkı “narrow, small” T    
    475 szül-ni (sulni)
    szül-et-ni (suletni)
    to give birth,
    to be born
    sal, sal-la = uterus, su   sulale “nation, dynasty, descendants”
    bošlun-, enüklä-, toɣur-, urïlan-“to give birth”
      Š 554; Š 7, 2, 3, 17; Gost. 444, 461; Sara 1994, p. 161 kling-klang?
    476 szuz (suz) virgin šis, geme-šiš (shis, geme-shish)   süzgün “weak”
    qapaqliɣ “virgin”
      Š 331/14,b; Gost. 443; Sara 1994, p. 161 kling-klang?
    477 tag limb, member dag   tike “piece”
    budaɣ, butaq, butïq , dal, tal  “limb”
    T Š 280; Gost. 454; Sara 1994, p. 162 kling-klang?
    478 tág,
    wide, broad,
    broad, roomy
    dag-al, dag   dagı-mak “to divorce, to dissolve”
    bosa-, çöz- “to divorce”
    jetiz, keŋ, keŋlig “wide”
      Š 237; 280; Gost. 172, 454; Sara 1994, p. 162 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    479 tag-ad-ni to deny tag “deny, divorce”   degil “not, no” T Š 126; Gost. 293; Sara 1994, p. 162  
    480 tak-ács (takahch) weaver tug   doku-mak “to weave” T Š 536; Gost. 524; Sara 1994, p. 162 -mak/-mek is not a stem (Lat. toga?)
    481 takar-ni,
    to cover,
    cover, blanket
    tug, ara9, bu
    šu..tag = cover; tug = cloth
      takın-mak “to put on”
    takın, talqït “tuck in”, taq-“tuck”
    T Š 574; 24; 11/2, 7; 536; MSL III 5, 156; Gost. 296, 287, 495, 524; Sara 1994, p. 162 -mak/-mek is not a stem; Eng. tuck in
    482 táltos (*tulte)
    shaman, sorcerer
    highest shaman,
    “wise” man, scientist
    tal, tala = to know   talul-mak “to choose”; talu “excellent” (OT)   Š 383/3; Gost. 109; Sara 1994, p. 163 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    483 tám-aszta-ni (tamastani)
    tám-aszt-ék (tamastek)
    to lean s.th. against; to cause; to demand,
    retaining beam
    dam, dim, tum   tam = “whole, complete”   Š 557; 94/13; 207; Gost. 440, 564, 566; Sara 1994, p. 163 kling-klang?
    484 tap-ad-ni,
    tapasztani (tapasztani)
    to adhere, to stick,
    to glue, to paste
    tab   yapış-mak “to adhere, to stick”
    jap- “to glue
    T Š 124/4; Gost. 391; Sara 1994, p. 164 -mak/-mek is not a stem, -ış a verbal abstract affix
    485 táp
    feed (noun)
    to nourish,
    to live on s.th.
    tab   tap “strength, might”
    tap “receive, obtain
    T Š 124/4; Gost. 391; Sara 1994, p. 164 kling-klang?
    486 tarka colorful
    (szines = colorful)
    dar = dim?   dıgı “colorful”
    bögrül, esrï, esrïnü, qartal “spotted, mottled”
    T Š 114; Gost. 178; Sara 1994, p. 164  
    487 tár-ni
    to open wide, to store
    hold, keep, support
    dari = support
      tarmaq “to divide, to share” (OT); arala-mak “to pull apart, to open”   Š 383; Gost. 410; Sara 1994, p. 164 -mak/-mek is not a stem, kling-klang?
    488 táv-ol, messze far away ta ?   tavuş-mak “to walk quietly”   Gost. 856; Sara 1994, p. 165 -mak/-mek is not a stem, kling-klang?
    489 teke cone gišlukul (gishukul)   tekerlek “round”   Š 536/27; Gost. 594; Sara 1994, p. 166 kling-klang?
    490 teknö, old degenö trough gakkul   tekne “trough”
    qoɣüs “trough”
      Š 416/6; MSL III 165; Gost. 601; Sara 1999, p. 108 kling-klang?
    491 tél (telet)  (*l/n)
    tél-en = wintertime
    winter til-la, ten = cold l/n
    en-ten = winter time
      xel “winter” (Chuv.) T Š 73; MSL III 75/9; Gost. 71; Sara 1994, p. 167  
    492 tele, teli,
    to get full;
    to pass (time),
    til-a, til = complete, end of, full   dolu “full” T Š 73; MSL III 75/9; Gost. 71, 888; Sara 1994, p. 167  
    493 temet-ni, (from töm)
    to bury,
    temen, tum,
    ki-tum = burial place
      doldur-mak “to fill, to stuff”
    köm-, küli-, semäklä-“to bury”, cemetery
    mezarlık, şehitlik, kabristan “cemetery”
      Š 376; 206; Gost. 7, 266, 409; Sara 1994, p. 167 -mak/-mek is not a stem, kling-klang?
    494 tenge-i, teng-öd-ni to get by miserably, to vegetate, waste of life tin   tiŋ-mak “to rotate, to turn around in the air” (OT)   Š 465; Gost. 70; Sara 1994, p. 167 kling-klang?
    495 tenni, tesz (tesz) , tev-
    -t, -d, -l, -og
    to make, to do
    te, du = do,
     -du, -ag = verbatives
      et-mek “to make, to do” T Š 376; Gost. 348; Sara 1994, p. 168 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    496 tenyér palm tibir  b~m?   aya “palm”   Š 126; Gost. 215; Sara 1994, p. 167 kling-klang?
    497 tenyész-ni (tenyesni).
    tenyész-te-ni (tenyesteni)
    to grow, to thrive,
    to breed,
    tin   tane “semen, family, germ”
    art-, ašïl- “breed”
      Š 465; Gost. 70; Sara 1994, p. 167 kling-klang?
    498 tér (teret),
    to spread out, to cover,
    to extend, to stretch,
    to lead, to guide, convert (religious)
    (giš)tir (gishtir) , dur, durum
    dir-ga = ceremonial glen
      ara “spot, place”   Š 375/6; 536/14; Gost. 50, 466; Sara 1994, p. 168 kling-klang?
    499 tér-ni to return  kur9, dur, durun   ters “turn” T Š 58; 536/14; Gost. 298, 466; Sara 1994, p. 168  
    500 test body tešti (teshti)?   ten “body”
    bod, bädän, et, etüz, jin, kövtüŋ, sïn “body”
    T Š 575; Gost. 253; Sara 1994, p. 168 Eng. body
    501 tilos,
    to forbid,
    to protest
    til-la, tilla   tydyg “prohibition” (OT) T Š 73; Gost. 71, 196; Sara 1994, p. 169  
    502 tiszt (tist),
    tiszta (tista)
    clean, neat
    d-DIŠ (d-DISH)   diz-mek “to put in order to arrange” (semantics “clean, neat”) T LM 480; Gost. 23; Sara 1994, p. 170 -mak/-mek is not a stem; kling-klang?
    503 titok,
    secret, furtive
    tu6-tu6   tydyg “prohibition” (OT)
    bük, raz, sir, sirr “secret”
      Š 16; Gost. 26; Sara 1994, p. 170 kling-klang?
    504 tó (tavat) lake tul = pond   tav “watering”   Š 511; Gost. 87; Sara 1994, p. 170  
    505 tok
    case, container
    to hide from view
    dug   sok-mak “to put into”
    jančïq, jančuq , janlïq, jenäk, jetgak, kesürgü, kisa, kiz “purse”
      Š 309; Gost. 539; Sara 1994, p. 171 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    506 tol-ni to push ta   tuldur-mak “to push away” (OT), itelemek “to push”
    it-, tul- “to push”
    T Gost. 856; Sara 1994, p. 171 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    507 töv (tövet) trunk
    base of the plant
    ti, tab, tu, tud, le   tub “root, trunk” (OT) T MSL III 104ss.; 73; Š 124/4; 376; Gost. 72, 222, 391, 445, 821; Sara 1994, p. 173  
    508 tögy udder tu, tud   tuš“ breast, bosom” (OT) T Gost. 445; Sara 1999, p. 112  
    509 tölte-ni to fill, spend time til-la = fill, live   dol-mak “to fill, to stuff” T Š 73; 69; MSL III 75/9; Gost. 71; Sara 1994, p. 173 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    510 töm-ni,
    to stuff,
    soild, compact
    temen = foundation ??,
    duburm tum,
      tun-maq “to stuff into” (OT), tum “round, whole, complete”   Š 376; 400/2, 3; 206; 207; Gost. 7, 228, 266, 566; Sara 1994, p. 173 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    511 tör dagger gir (giri)   tor “trap, net”
    giren “piercing instrument”, bičäk, bïčaq, bïčɣuč, bögdä, böktä, bügdä, bükdä, cherkes, chirkes, egdü, jegü, karata, kezlik, kingirak, kurda, qïŋraq “knife, dagger”
    T Š 10; MSL III 163; Gost. 624; Sara 1994, p. 174 kling-klang?
    512 tör-ni,
    to break,
    care about,
    law, a rule
    nam(tar), tar   tar-maq “to break apart” (OT), kı-mak “to break” T Š 79; MSL III 101/65; IV 125ss.; Š 12; Gost. 59, 268; Sara 1994, p. 174 -mak/-mek is not a stem (A custom)
    513 tör-öl-ni to wipe off tar   tarla-mak “to clean” (OT) T Š 12; Gost. 268; Sara 1994, p. 175 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    514 törzs (torj) trunk, tribe tuš (tush)   ozdek “tree-trunk”
    olun “tree-trunk, stem”
      Š 536/14; Gost. 426, 467; Sara 1994, p. 175 kling-klang?
    515 tövis (*tonŋe)
    thorn, spine
    ti = arrow,
    dih = barb

      tıg “needle” T Š 73; Gost. 222; Sara 1994, p. 175  
    516 tud-ni,
    tan-ul, tan-it, tanuló
    to know,
    to inquire,
    learn, teach, pupil
    tu6-dug4-ga, zu, tu6
    dun = pupil
      tut-mak “to catch, to understand”
    bil-, pil- “learn, know”, tanï- “know”, tüpkär- “explore”
    T Š 16; 6; Gost. 3, 312, 453; Sara 1994, p. 175  
    517 túl beyond tu15, tu15-tab-ba   tul “length”
    -tïn, -tin, -tün, -tïnki, -tinki, -tünki (locative adj. affix)
    T Gost. 128; Sara 1999, p. 113  
    518 tur-ni to dig, to root up dun   dormek “to dig” T Š 467; Gost. 422; Sara 1994, p. 176  
    519 needle ti bis, ti, attu   tıg “needle” T Š 73/47; 73; Gost. 73, 222, 680; Sara 1994, p. 176  
    520 tüdö lungs ti   duduk “bagpipe; long, empty”
    öpkä, övkä “lungs”
      Š 73; Gost. 222; Sara 1994, p. 176 kling-klang?
    521 tulok horn (animal) tigi   tuluk “pipe, bagpipe, horn (animal)”
    mügüz, miŋïz, müjüz, müŋüz “horn (animal)”, qaltuq “horn rhyton”, šütük “object of hollow horn”, toqluq “hornless”
    T Š 352; Gost. 587; Sara 1994, p. 186  
    522 tündér fairy
    nature gods
    dingir   tuymek “to run away, to disappear”
    tengir, tengri “god, heaven”
    T Š 322/35d; Gost. 1, 19; Sara 1994, p. 177 Sum. dingir = deity, godhood; ?heavenly
    523 tüs-ke spine ?,thorn ti bis, ti, ittitu (akk.)   diş “tooth”
    arqa, süskun “spine”
      Š 73/47; 73; Gost. 73, 222, 681; Sara 1999, p. 114 kling-klang?
    524 tüz fire tu 6, tab = burn, izi = fire   ısı “heat, glowing fire”
    tamdu, tamduq “fire, flame”, tamdur- “ignite, enkindle”
    T Š 16; Gost. 453; Sara 1994, p. 177 kling-klang?
    525 ugra-ni
    to jump u5   buqra-maq “to jump” (OT) T Gost. 278; Sara 1994, p. 178  
    526 új (uy) new u, u-dur   uyan-mak “to liven up”
    yaŋï “new”
      Gost. 417; Sara 1994, p. 178 kling-klang?
    527 úr,
    uri-szék (urisek)
    sir, master, lord
    lordship, kingdom
    patrimonial court
    ur, ur-sag, u bis, ur   uruk “nation”
    erklig, erklüg “sir, master”
    T Š 575/3; MSL III 132/6; Š 575/2, 3; Gost. 481, 699, 734; Sara 1994, pp. 178s kling-klang?
    528 usz-ni (usni),
    usz-ó (uso),
    usz-ony (usony)
    to swim,
    u5, ušm(-gal/-bašu) (ushm) , uz-mušn (mushn) , a-usum   yuzmek “to swim” T Š 11; 372/2, 3; Gost. 278, 741, 773, 779; Sara 1994, p. 179  
    529 út street, road
    water way
    id, u5   ot-mak “to go across, to go over” (OT)   Š 579; Gost. 54, 278; Sara 1994, p. 179 -mak/-mek is not a stem
    530 után after ud, ud-(d)a   udu “behind; after” (OT)
    andan, basa, kedin, keδïn, kejin, kin, ötrü, ötürü, son, soŋ, udu, uδu “after”
    T Š 381; Gost. 42; Sara 1994, p. 179
    Sum. ud, ud-(d)a
    531 üdv,
    well-being, salvation,
    useful, salutary,
    to welcome
    utu   üdik “longing, love” (OT)   Š 381; 393; Gost. 43; Sara 1994, p. 179 kling-klang?
    532 ügy
    affair, matter
    ug, ung, uku   iş “affair, matter, work”
    amal, fi'l, iš, jumuš, tuturɣu “task, work, act”
      Š 312; Gost. 483; Sara 1994, p. 180 kling-klang?
    533 ük grand-grand-parent ugu “give birth”,
      oguš “trunk, nation” (OT) T Š 412/2, 3; MSL III 120, 374; 412; Gost. 211, 381; Sara 1994, p. 180  
    534 üld-öz-ni to pursue ul 7   iz “trace”
    er-, ir-, qaerus, qov-, sür-, sürkïla-. sürkülä, sürus “chase, pursue
    T Š 354; Gost. 371; Sara 1994, p. 180  
    535 ül-ni to sit ur, ur x   oldur-maq “to sit” (OT)
    bagdaš-, baɣdasïn-, oldur-, oltur-, olur- “to sit”
    T Š 203/3; MSL V 274; Gost. 245, 471; Sara 1994, p. 180  
    536 ür,
    emptiness, space
    egir, ur5, ur x   iri “big, extensive”
    javalïq, quruɣ “emptiness” “hollow”
      MSL VI 59/99; Š 401; 209; MSL V 274; Gost. 197, 236, 247, 471; Sara 1994, p. 180  
    537 üszö (üsö) heifer u-zug, ušzu (ushzu)   disi “young woman” ???   Š 318/28; Gost. 502, 652; Sara 1994, p. 181  
    538 üszök (üsök) ,
    üszög (üsög)
    fire ?, 
    burning log
    u-zug, asag   oksu “fire” T Š 518/28; Gost. 502, 881; Sara 1994, p. 181  
    539 üt-ni to hit utu-, usu, usu   it-mek “to push, to hit” T Š 381; 393; Gost. 43, 277, 882; Sara 1994, p. 181 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem
    540 üvölte-ni to howl, to roar i-lu, e-lu, u-lu   ugulda-mak “to howl, to roar”
    ulï- (v.) “wail, moan, bellow”
    T Gost. 424; Sara 1994, p. 191 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; Eng. ululate, howl
    541 üz-ni,
    to chase, pursue
    uzu, azu, lu-uš (lu-ush) (ush),  uz = doctor   uz-mek “to disturb”
    ud-, uδ-, ut-, uz- “follow”
    T Š 181-2; LM 17; 211; Gost. 10, 11, 276; Sara 1994, p. 181 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem;
    542 vad
    wilderness, forest
    bad = uncultivated land   od, ot “grass, food”, otlak “heardsman”
    bujmul , jaba, jïrtuč, keδik, kejik, kejlig, mujmul “wild”
    T Š 69; Gost. 362; Sara 1994, p. 182 kling-klang?
    543 vágni,
    to cut,
    to hash
    bi 6- = tear, cut off
      ayı-mak “to cut in pieces, to share” T Š 97; MSL III 291; Gost. 304; Sara 1994, p. 182 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem
    544 vágy,
    longing, yearning,
    to long for, to yearn for
    u-ma (m~b?)   ac “hungry”   LM 455; Gost. 134; Sara 1994, p. 182 kling-klang?
    545 vaj butter i, ia   yag “butter, lard” T Š 231; Gost. 556; Sara 1994, p. 182  
    546 váj-ni to hollow out alal, bal bis   oy-mak “to hollow out, to scratch out” T Š 316; 317-2, 6; 9; Gost. 32, 289; Sara 1994, p. 183 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem;
    547 val, vel, el (comitative suffix)   (*the /Ugrian)  with bal
    -da (commitative case)
      ile, bile, la, le (comitative suffixes) T Š 9; MSL III 79/1; Gost. 288; Sara 1994, p. 183  
    548 váll shoulder ba-al   kol “hand, arm”
    egin, egnin “shoulder”
      MSL III 79/12; Gost. 250; Sara 1994, p. 183 kling-klang?
    549 vál-ni,
    to change into; separate,divorce,
    to change (money), to exhange,
    to change o.s.,
    to change
    bala, bara = outer, side, shoulder
    bal = change (*w>b/u)
      ol-mak “to be, to become, to change” T Š 9; MSL III 79/1; Gost. 288; Sara 1994, p. 183  
    550 van,
    to have, to be
    me = it is,
    ba- = was
      var “is” (Altaic *pol)
    bar-, par-, “is”
      Gost. 267; Sara 1994, p. 183 Proto Altaic *pol,  ProtoUralic *wole, Dravidic *panu
    551 vár,
    uru-as (arch)
    fortress, castle
    town, city
    uru = city, town   baru “wall of a fortress, castle”
    barq “building, structure”
    T Š 38; Gost. 476; Sara 1999, p. 117 Eng. bar
    552 varázs (varaj),
    to perform magic
    garaš (garash)   pus-, tars-, “to hit, knock repeatedly”   Š 319/4, 6; Gost. 18; Sara 1999, p. 117  
    553 varjú crow buru4 (*w>b)   karga “crow”
    karga, kale, kuzgun “crow, rook, raven”
    T? Š 79/4x, 79a/2, 8, 9/37; Gost. 765; Sara 1994, p. 184  
    554 vár-ni to wait uru?   barı-mak “to hide o.s.” (Persian), barıdar-mak “to guard, to watch”
    küδ-, küs-, küt-, um- “to wait
      Š 56; Gost. 396; Sara 1994, p. 183 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang? Suggested Turk. barımak “to hide o.s.” (Persian) is a borrowing
    555 vén ancient, very old person en   fani “rotten, obsolete, outdated” (Arabic)
    eski, qarï, ulug, uluq, õoǯa “ancient”
      Š 9; Gost. 9; Sara 1994, p. 185 kling-klang?
     Finnish veine-monen = the ancient god
    556 vér blood bar, uru *w>b/u   vürey “vein”
    qan “blood”, ekčäk, tamir “vein”
    T Š 74/58; 74/105; Gost. 205a; Sara 1994, p. 185  
    557 ver-ni to hit, to beat bir, ber   vur-mak “to hit, to beat” T Š 400/5, 6; Gost. 487; Sara 1994, p. 185 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem
    558 vés-ni to chisel haš (hash)   eş-mek (eshmek) “to dig, to dig out”   Š 12; Gost. 270; Sara 1994, p. 186 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem
    559 vesszö (vessö) switch, twig giš-pa (gish-pa)   asa “stick, club” T MSL IV 150; Gost. 627; Sara 1994, p. 186 kling-klang?
    560 vét-ek,
    sin, fault,
    to sin
    bad   bat-mak “to sink, to be devastated”   Š 69; Gost. 362; Sara 1994, p. 186 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang?
    561 vez-ér,
    to lead
    us = follow
      başla-mak (bashlamak) “to lead”
    bašla- (bashla) “to head, lead” (bash = head)
    T Š 314, 50; Gost. 689; Sara 1999, p. 119 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem
    562 világ,
    to flash, to sparkle
    bul 4, mú(l) = ignite, to light, shine
      yıdıa-mak “to shine, to flash, to sparkle”   Š 172; Gost. 350, 451; Sara 1994, p. 187 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang?
    563 vir-ág
    to be bright, brilliant
    gir-ag   yıdıa-mak “to shine, to flash, to sparkle”   Š 483; Gost. 799; Sara 1994, p. 187 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang?
    564 vissza (vissa) back to (not backside) ušsa (ushsa)   ız “backside”
    köt “backside”
    T Š 211; Gost. 827; Sara 1994, p. 188  
    565 viz water id, biz, bis   ılak “watery, wet”   Š 579; Gost. 54, 657; Sara 1994, p. 188  
    566 zaj racket, noise za-pa-ag, suh   čagla-mak “to trickle, to rush, to roar”   Š 569/3, 8a; Gost. 193, 324; Sara 1994, p. 189 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang?
    567 zak-at-ol-ni to make a racket, to rattle, to harras za-pa-ag, suh   sık-mak “to disturb”; şakla-mak (shaklamak) “to bang, to slam, to slap”   Š 569/3, 8a; Gost. 193, 324; Sara 1994, p. 189 -mak/-mek/-mag is not a stem; kling-klang?
    568 zár-ni,
    to close,
    šar3, saru, ur5
    za = lock
      zor “difficult, heavy”
    beklä-, kiritlä- “to lock, close” (this sb Hu: zord, not a lock)
      Š 151; 401/53, 54, 229; Gost. 509, 558; Sara 1994, p. 189 kling-klang?
    569 zavar-ni to disturb za-pa-ag, suh   savur-mak “to blow, to spread all over”   Š 569/3, 8a; Gost. 193, 324; Gost. 193, 324; Sara 1994, pp. 189s kling-klang?
    570 zokon
    *something that causes painful feelings
    *cry heavily and loud
    zig, suh   zonkla-mak “to boom, to roar”   Š 84; 569/3, 8a; Gost. 321, 324; Sara 1999, p. 121 kling-klang?
    571 zöld, zöd green sig7   yesil “green”  T MSL III 127, 362; Gost. 176; Sara 1994, p. 190 kling-klang?
    572 zör-ög-ni
    to rattleing, to rumble
    a rattle,rumble
    zúra = noisy chatter
      zır “noise” T Gost. 193; Sara 1994, p. 191  
    573 szög
    szeg-ély (different root)
    angle, wedge, nail
    border, edge
    zage = angle
    saŋ = point
      zıh “border, edge”   Š 332/19; Gost. 81; Sara 1994, p. 191 kling-klang?
    574 zúg-ni to rush, to roar, howling sound  suh, ug   ugla-mak “ro rush, to roar” T Š 569/3, 8a; Gost. 324, 781; Sara 1994, p. 191  
    575 zuz-ni to smash, to crush zu, sud   ezmek “to smash, to crush” T Š 15/13, 50; 235, 341; Gost. 235, 341; Sara 1994, p. 191 “”čşöüğθδğŋγşāáäēə ï ōūû
    576 zür chaos šir, sir   zırdeli “abnormal, chaotic” T Š 71; Gost. 51; Sara 1994, p. 191  
    577 zsar-ol-ni
    to blackmail
    šar3, saru   ser “badness, wickedness”   Š 151; Gost. 509; Sara 1994, p. 191 kling-klang?

    577 = Total words


    296 = Total "T"s


    3. Conclusion

    Via their common Sumerian roots, Turkish and Hungarian share 557 or 55% of their etyma from the 1042 etyma of the comparative Sumerian dictionary by Gostony (1975). This strongly points to a common Sumerian origin of both the Turkic and the Hungarian people, that was already postulated by Hommel (1915) and confirms the early hypothesis of Ungnad (1927; 136, pp. 11ss.) that the cradle of the Turkic people stood somewhere in the Oxus area in today’s Turkmenistan:
    - 686 -

    The Turkic languages play also an important role in the so-called Eurasian substrate (cf. chapter 9 and Hummel 1991). Since the Greek (Konstantinos Prophyrogennetos, 11thcentury) and the Arabic (Ibn Fadlan and others) sources (10th century) constantly consider the Hungarians to be a Turkic people (cf. Moravcsik 1942, 1958), one may assume – in the light of the main result of the present study, i.e. the 55% of common Sumerian-Turkish-Hungarian cognates -, that the Turkic people and the Hungarians may have separated only after having still having lived together some centuries in today’s Turkmenistan after wandering out of Sumeria. Therefore, the Hungarians, who were bound to the Carpathian Basin, could not have taken – as it is generally assumed (cf. e.g. Bobula 1967) – the direct way from today’s Iran via the Black Sea towards the north. This eastward instead of northward route would also explain, why Friar Julianus found still in the 13th century Hungarians in Bashkiria, since Bashkiria lay – very roughly speaking - on the way from Mesopotamia to the Oxus area and then in a huge semicircle-turn to the Carpathian Basin. So, a few of this Sumerians, that were not to form the different Turkic people that spread out from Eastern Europe to Sibria and even Western China, neither to become the ancestors of the today’s Hungarians including the Csangos (Changos), must have settled in Bashkiria, where they were later melted together with the Turkic speaking Bashkirians – after all originally their relatives.

    4. Bibliography

    Bobula, Ida, Herencia de Sumeria. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico 1967
    Gostony, Colman-Gabriel, Dictionnarie d’etymologie sumerienne. Paris 1975
    Hommel, Fritz, Hundert sumero-turkische Wortgleichungen. Sonderdruck Munich 1915
    Hummel, Siegbert, Beziehungen des Sumerischen zu einigen Sprachen im protoaltaischen Susbtrat. In:
    Anthropos 86, 1991, pp. 174-184.
    Laut, Jens Peter, Das Turkische als Ursprache? Wiesbaden 2000.
    Moravcsik, Gyula, Byzantinoturcica. 2 vols. Budapest 1942, 1958
    - 687 -

    Sara, Peter, A magyar nyelv eredeterCl maskeppen. Budapest 1994
    Sara, Peter, .si szavaink nyomaban Irani es Turani tajakon. Budapest 1999
    Starostin, Sergei, Anna Dybo and Oleg Mudrak, Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages. 3 vols. Leiden 2003
    Ungnad, Arthur, Sumerische und chinesische Schrift. In: Wiener Zeitschrift zur Kunde des Morgenlandes 34, 1927, pp. 76ss.
    Ungnad, Arthur, Subartu. Berlin and Leipzig 1936
    - 745 -

    18. Conclusions

    In chapter 3, we found that from the ten Finno-Ugric languages Hungarian, Vogulic, Ostyak, Syryen, Cheremis, Mordwin, Finnic, Estonian, Lapponic and the two Samoyed languages Nganasan and Selkup, the Finno-Ugric group shares only 31.91% of common words – ranging from 34% down to 10.0%, the two Symoyed languages only 22%, and therefore the average percentage of all Uralic languages is as low as 26.95%. Given these calculations, according to the Swadesh list and its related statistics, Proto-Uralic should have existed about 9000 years ago, the separation of the Samoyed languages should have happened even 2000 years earlier – in open contradiction with the fact, that then they split before they got a member of the Proto-Uralic family, etc. What we want to point out is that the Uralic theory leads itself ad absurdum.

    On the other side, Hungarian shares 91% of its basic vocabulary with Sumerian and 7% with Akkadian, the other big language spoken at about the same time in Mesopotamia, before the Sumerians started to emigrate. Starting with the Sumerian-Hungarian theory, only 2% of the Hungarian words are meanwhile still “of unknown origin”. However, in chapter 4, we showed, that according to four standard etymological dictionaries of Hungarian, between 25% and 39% of the Hungarian words are “of unknown origin” –and an extremely high percentage - probably more than 50% - is in addition to them of “uncertain”, “difficult”, “problematic” etc. origin. We draw two conclusions out this facts: First, the Finno-Ugric and Uralic theories at unscientific, because they contradict their own principles, and second, there are neither a Finno-Ugric nor an Uralic language family. The few common words that the Northern “Finno-Ugric” and the Samoyed languages share with Hungarian, have all their roots in Sumerian and must therefore be explained via borrowing from Hungarian.

    In the following, we shall show the respective percentages of shared cognates between Sumerian, Hungarian and the other languages that have been scrutinized in this book:

    Chapter 5: Hungarian = Sumerian: 1042 words = 100%
    Chapter 6: Hungarian = “Finno-Ugric” languages: 31.9%
    Chapter 7: Hungarian = Caucasian: 7%
    Chapter 8: Hungarian = Bantu: 8%
    Chapter 9: Hungarian = Etruscan: 33% (but here the reference was not Gostony 1975)
    Chapter 10: Hungarian = Tibeto-Burman: ca. 50% (here, the reference was not Gostony 1975, either)
    Chapter 11: Hungarian = Munda: 33%
    Chapter 12: Hungarian = Dravidian: 36%
    Chapter 13: Hungarian = Chinese: 61%
    Chapter 14: Hungarian = Japanese: 23%
    Chapter 15: Hungarian = Turkish: 55%
    Chapter 16: Hungarian = Austronesian (incl. Mon-Khmer, Australian and Tasmanian): 3%
    Chapter 17: Hungarian = Mayan: 11%
    - 746 -

    If we order these languages according to the percentages of their genetic relationship, we get:

    Hungarian (100%) > Chinese (61%) > Turkish (55%) > Tibeto-Burman (ca. 50%) > Dravidian (36%) > Munda (33%) = Etruscan (ca. 33%) > “FU” languages (31.9%) > Japanese (23%) > Mayan (11%) > Bantu (8%) > Caucasian (7%) > Austronesian (incl. Mon Khmer, Australian and Tasmanian) (3%). We can now draw the following conclusions:

    1. The two “Turanian” languages Hungarian and Turkish show naturally a high percentage of genetic relationship (55%), while the relationship between Hungarian and the other “Turanian” language considered in this book, Japanese, is rather low (23%). Perhaps, this is a hint to do further research in order to control if Japanese is really an Altaic language or not. Like Sumerian and Hungarian, all “Turanian”, i.e. Ural-Altaic languages are agglutinative.

    2. While the genetic relationship between Hungarian, Turkish and (probably) Japanese is not a surprise, Korosi Csoma Sandor’s theory of a very significant Hungarian-related population in Tibet is fully confirmed (ca. 50%). Like Sumerian and Hungarian, Tibetan is an agglutinative language, but strangely enough with ablaut (apophony).

    3. A surprise is that Dravidian has a higher percentage (36%) of genetic relationship than the Munda languages (33%). But nevertheless, von Hevesy’s idea that the Munda-Khol family must be accepted as another member of the “Finno-Ugric” languages, is confirmed. Both Dravidian and the Munda languages are agglutinative like Sumerian and Hungarian.

    4. Since the idea, that Etruscan and Hungarian may be genetically related, is pretty old, it is not a surprise, that both languages share ca. 33% of their cognates. Like Sumerian and Hungarian, Etruscan is agglutinative.

    5. The “FU” languages, that share between 10% and 31.9% of their word stock, have already been explained as genetically not related to Hungarian, their common vocabulary and certain grammatical features, e.g. agglutination, being considered as borrowed.

    6. A surprise are the 11%, that Hungarian shares with the Mayan languages. They are even 1% closer related to one another than the two allegedly closely related Samoyed languages Naganasan and Selkup. There can be no doubt, that there is a genetic relationship between Hungarian and the Mayan languages, which may probably also explain, why the Mayan languages are agglutinative, too.

    7. Bantu (%), Caucasian (7%) and Austronesian (incl. Mon Khmer, Australian and Tasmanian) (3%) can hardly be considered genetically related to Hungarian, even Bantu and Caucasian are agglutinative, too. The cognates shared between these languages and Sumerian may be explained by wanderings of people of the Indian continent southwards.
    - 747 -

    8. After all, despite the knowledge that genetic relationship between languages does not follow necessarily from the fact that these languages share certain typological features, it is rather surprising and cannot be considered by change that from the 14 languages or language families, that were researched in this book, 13 are agglutinative.
    - 788 -


    ALFRÉD TÓTH was born in 1965 in St. Gallen (Switzerland), his native tongue is Hungarian. Received two PhD's (1989 Mathematics, University of Zurich; 1992 Philosophy, University of Stuttgart) and an MA (General and Comparative Linguistics, Finno-Ugristics and Romanistics, University of Zurich 1991). Mr. Tóth is since 2001 Professor of Mathematics (Algebraic Topology) in Tucson, Arizona. He is member of many mathematical, semiotic, cybernetic and linguistic societies and scientific board member of eight international journals. Lives in Tucson and Szombathely where his family comes from.

    In Russian
    Contents Türkic languages
    Ogur and Oguz
    Türkic languages
    Türkic and European Genetic distance
    Classification of Türkic languages
    Indo-European, Dravidian, and Rigveda
    Türkic, Slavic and Iranian
    Türkic in English
    Türkic in Romance
    Alans in Pyrenees
    Türkic in Greek
    Türkic in Slavic
    Alan Dateline
    Avar Dateline
    Besenyo Dateline
    Bulgar Dateline
    Huns Dateline
    Karluk Dateline
    Khazar Dateline
    Kimak Dateline
    Kipchak Dateline
    Kyrgyz Dateline
    Sabir Dateline
    Seyanto Dateline
    Ðåéòèíã@Mail.ru “”čθδğŋγşāáäēə ï öōüūû“” Türkic Türkic