Diakonoff, I. M., & Starostin, S. A., Hurro-Urartian as an Eastern
|
|  Yüklə 25 Kb.
|
| From:
Diakonoff, I.M., & Starostin, S.A., "Hurro-Urartian as an Eastern Caucasian Language," Munchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, Beiheft و12, 1986 (103 pages). "In our preceding publications we had already noted the probability of Hurro-Urartian belonging to the North Caucasian linguistic phylum. This hypothesis can now be verified." ... "with the help of their (i.e. Diakonoff and Starostin) files it is now possible to etymologize nearly 40 percent of the Urartian and about 30 percent of the Hurrian words which have been more or less reliably interpreted. It appears that Hurro-Urartian fits into North Eastern Caucasian as one of its (i.e. North Eastern Caucasian -S.R.T.) branches." In this book, Starostin and Diakonoff find about 100 lexical cognates, many of them "fundamental" items that are rarely borrowed, and many correspondences in grammatical affixes. They propose that the H-U family is a branch of the NE Caucasian family coequal with the others, though perhaps closer to Nakh. The usual Anti-Iranian Pan-turkist forgers (Zehtabi, Sadiq) following their Pan-turkist mentors in Ankara and Baku have recently claimed that the Hurrians, Urartu, Caspi, Kassi, Gutti, Lullubi, Tapurs, Manana, Amards.. are all Turkish groups! Additionally they also claim other non-related groups like Elamites and Sumerians to also be Turkish. Had they been semi intelligent and a little bit less adventerous when it comes to falsification of historical facts, they would have noticed that the foundation of their theory has no basis. Simply these groups of languages Hurrian, Sumerian and Elamite are unrelated and categorized in different groups. In the case of Elamite and Sumerian, they belong to isolate language groups. Hurro-Urartian belongs to the North East Caucasian group. So to claim all three languages as Turkish is in itself a fallacy because these three languages are not even related to each other! With the exception of a good amount of texts in Urartu and small amount of Hurrian writing from graves and other archeological finds, there is absolutely no remnants left from the Caspi, Kassi, Gutti, Lulubi, Manana, Amards. Some scholars categorize some of these groups like the Manna, Lullubi and Gutti as Hurrian Clans and sub-groups. For example in the above mentioned refrence what little we know of the language of the Gutis, according to palaeo-linguist Diakonoff, is that it is a Hurrian dialect similar, for example, to Urartian. Diakonoff mentions the Gutti as a Hurrian sub-group who were also related to the Manna and Lullubi. Looking at the geographical places of these groups, the Gutti were settled mainly in modern Kurdistan, the Lulubi were settled mainly in modern Lorestan, the Tapurs were settled in modern Mazandaran and Gilan, the Hurrians and Urartu were settled in eastern Anatolia, the Caspis were settled in central and western Iran and in conclusion none of these groups with the except of the manna were settled in the Iranian province of Azarbaijan. Similarly the Sumerians were settled in Central and Southern Iraq and the Elamite main settlement is that of the Iranian province of Khuzestan. If we take the opinion of most scholars that all of these groups were related to the Hurrians and Urartu, then none of them are Altaic people. Also there is not even a single world recognized scholar that claims any affinity between Turko-Mongols and the Hurrians. The Hurro-Urartian people spoke a North-Eastern Caucasian languages which is independent of the Altaic branch of languages. For example the Caucasian languages like some Indo-European languages Kurmanji Kurdish and Avestan are Ergative languages. The modern speakers of these languages include Chechens, Lezgins, Ingush, Avars and other Caucasian people. There is absolutely no linkage between the Altaic and the three independent Caucasian language groups and that is why all linguistic books have differentiated between these two separate branches of Human languages. Also scholars like Diaknoff, Greppin and others have found many interesting similarities and common words between Indo-European languages of Armenian, Kurdish and Persian on one hand and Hurrian languages on the other hand. This is specially true in the case of Armenian. You can find more information that connects the Uratu-Hurrian languages to the North Eastern Caucasian languages in this section of Azargoshnasp devoted to the Hurrians. Also there are two articles from recognized and established journals that demonstrates the affinity between Uratu-Hurrian and Armenian. Refrence: Diakonoff: Cambridge History of Iran: Volume 2, The Median and Archaemenian Periods Diakonoff, I.M., & Starostin, S.A., "Hurro-Urartian as an Eastern Caucasian Language," Munchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, Beiheft و12, 1986 (103 pages). ..(more will be here) |