Reconstruction talk:Proto-Turkic/sarïmsak

@Theudariks: 1) Sources? Especially for the Chuvash term descending from PT? 2) we render ɨ as ï Ketiga123 (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fay Freak: If the word is absent from Chuvash, then it is not a Proto-Turkic word? And if it is absent from Siberian, it is not even Common Turkic? When was it borrowed into Hungarian? Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 07:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Allahverdi Verdizade I would say so. However it is always possible that a word is borrowed into Proto-Turkic but remains restricted to a part of it. I have such suspicions for other words too, as the word for the hammer, Talk:چكیچ § Proto-Turkic, or formed after Proto-Turkic and borrowed into Iranian, or formed in Iranian?, and notorious it is for the word melon قاون that is consciously reconstructed for a part of Proto-Turkic since the melon cannot grow in the far north.

What did the Proto-Turks call the garlic else, since as we can suppose in the relevant time (500 AD?) they already knew the garlic, *sogan? (Note that even in Proto-Semitic there was a word for the garlic, *θūm-, that is 3700+ BCE.) That is also a question. If we can say there is an other word then it is safer to say that *sarïmsak, *sarmusak didn’t exist. Fay Freak (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

sogan is onion, not garlic. Maybe it was present in Common Turkic, maybe not (500 AD is approximately the time of its disintegration). The Hungarian form needs no be explained. In any case, this should be moved away from Proto-Turkic. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Allahverdi Verdizade Yes dear, but what is an onion? Various types of Allium species, also called leek; there are about a thousand of species in the world, all of which are considered edible, and while of course today a few specific ones make the bulk there are many wild Allium species some of which taste halfway between common onion (Allium cepa) and garlic (Allium sativum).

Since both words in Slavic for the onion and leek, *lukъ and what you see under cēpulla, are borrowed after the third century when the Slavs, settling first in the Закарпатье / Подкарпатье, increasingly came in contact with German and Roman agriculturalists, it appears that the Slavs even did not know the “normal” onion or leek. What they did know is ramsons (Allium ursinum), *čermъša, since it abounds in these lands – great pictures on ле́вурда (lévurda) etc.! –, which perhaps fulfilled the culinary roles that today common onion (Allium cepa), chive (Allium schoenoprasum), Welsh onion (Allium fistulosum) cover, so can’t we explain from this better-known situation in about 200 AD that the Proto-Turks in 500 BCE didn’t know the Allium species that they – or their cultivated representants – use now? For example de.Wikipedia tells us about the winter onion (Allium fistulosum), so popular today in the West, that wild ones grow at the Altai and the Lake Baikal (somewhat distantly from the Proto-Turks?) and in China this sort was grown 2000 BC but the modern bulb onion (Speisezwiebel) has not been cultivated in China until the development of modern cultivars in the last decades. “sogan is onion” is easy, which onion? Which word was the one for garlic? As probably they did know garlic, Slavs did too – *česnъkъ, *česnъ –, but I don’t yet see which Allium species else and which terminology was used, perhaps *sogan indiscriminately? (But even that is луук in Yakut.) What perhaps Proto-Turkic words for Allium are there else? What archaeological evidence about Turkic Allium use? Fay Freak (talk) 22:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

There are no more words other than sarïmsak and soɣan. You should read SIGTYa p. 144 and maybe add the "yellow" hypothesis even if it seems less plausible. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 06:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Fay Freak.

It would be nice to unite the Indo European cognates first, do they really match? The Turkic word at first glance seems tied to Mongolic *sarana and *sarmug suggesting the Turkic word itself is probably derived from a shorter root as "-Vm-sa-k" is a recognazible affix. Saying the Mongolic words are also borrowed from Iranian through Turkic is without an obvious evidence. Clauson has a different opinion on the etymology, and another possible source is pointed out as Sanskrit श्रीमस्तक ("śrīmastaka") which also looks dubious.

I also do not understand the below part:

"The -sak ending of the Turkic word is depicted by Khwarezmian [script needed] (-cyk), Sogdian [script needed] (-cyq) that form the nisba adjective and noun".--Anylai (talk) 19:28, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

@Anylai 1. Yea, they match. If you don’t know it: Germanic h is from [k] by the First Germanic sound shift. Slavic č is from [k] by the Slavic first palatalization. s appears in Iranian from [k] because of its satem character. Celtic is complicated, I never deal with Celtic but the Irish word is commonly held to be cognate to the Germanic one.

2. But I cannot unite Indo-European cleanly, I never reconstruct Indo-European and have only rough conceptions of it, perhaps there are also too many unknown factors for someone who does regularly reconstruct PIE.

3. The passage you do not understand means that the -sak part in the Turkic word derives from an Iranian suffix that is written as said in Khwarezmian and Sogdian.

4. a) I don’t understand your formal Mongolic remarks. Also the Iranian is also from a shorter root, as explained in the paper. b) The obvious evidence is that Mongolic is not obviously a cognate language family to Turkic, hence there is a borrowing. Besides, the claim of a Turkic origin of the Mongolic words has already been on the Mongolic page and claimed elsewhere. c) You can cherrypick authors as you like, but I found the similarity of the Turkic word to the Slavic word striking and it went through my mind until I found the detailed exposition by Tatár, confirming my independent suspicion that the Turkic is borrowed from an unattested Iranian cognate. Fay Freak (talk) 19:54, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I know the initial consonants match, I am curious on the internal etymology, say within Iranian or Slavic. Suspicious of "older" Iranian languages not having the obvious "garlic" sense which was however borrowed into Turkic like that. There is no accepted Turkic etymology for the word, of course it may be a borrowing from the shorter Iranian root but that would make the resemblance coincidental to Germanic *hramusô, Slavic *čermъša or Iranian "*sarmesyk" or whatever. Mongolic also doesnt need to be a sister family for having cognates to Turkic, it is helpful in most cases to comment on the Turkic root as there is undeniable connection between these two families whether it is due to contact or inheritance. --Anylai (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

• @Fay Freak, Ah, I missed this conversation. I poo-pooed the Iranian etymology because it seems they were suggesting it was related to Persian سیر (sir), which can't be the case if it's from Old Persian *θigraʰ. I'm still highly suspicious though. I'm putting together a PIE entry for the IE forms. --{{victar|talk}} 19:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
• @Fay Freak, Persian سیرمو (sīrmū) is سیر (sīr, “garlic”) +‎ مو (mū, “hairy”), compare Allium subhirsutum, a.k.a. "hairy garlic". It *could* be that this term is derived from a "hairy garlic" Iranian word, but being related to κρόμμυον (krómmuon) et al seems really far fetched. --{{victar|talk}} 00:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

  @Victar I have now on the Proto-Turkic page reflected the consideration that it can be an Iranian borrowing without any relation to the ramsons word; though you haven’t explained the Khotanese and Hungarian words; it is still suspect of Iranian origin in spite of all.

  But this tracing of the current Iranian garlic words stands and falls with but guessing the meaning of a calendar month name, under the additional assumption of an ablaut, a guess which has been met with unwillingness also in Flattery, David Stophlet, Schwartz, Martin (1989) Haoma and Harmaline. The Botanical Identity of the Indo-Iranian Sacred Hallucinogen “Soma” and its Legacy in Religion, Language, and Middle Eastern Folklore (Near Eastern Studies; 21), Berkeley · Los Angeles · London: University of California Press, →ISBN, page 90 footnote 27 and Mary Boyce Hist. of Zoroastrianism II p. 25; and isn’t it statistically idiosyncratic to derive all those Iranian words now at Old Persian *θigraʰ from Proto-Ossetic? And one only hopes the “bitter” word Old Ossetic *cirǧ is not a Turkic borrowing as the things we say at Turkish sirke make sense. Fay Freak (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

  @Fay Freak: I don't know about the Hungarian word, but it could be borrowed from a Bulgaro-Turkic word just as easily. As for the Khotanese, we don't know the meaning of that word, and Khotanese has its own unrelated garlic term -- trying to relate it to the Turkish is wishful thinking. I don't know if OP *θigra- really existed, but MP [script needed] (syl /⁠sīr⁠/) did, and trying to connect it to Greek κρόμμυον (krómmuon) is pretty far fetched. As for the month name, Parthian also had a month named T̠igr, which supports the OP theory. If I was to make my own guess, unsupported by any sources, I think there was the original PII *ćigr- plant term, whence Sanskrit शिग्रु (śigru), and the Parthian month name is a MP borrowing. --{{victar|talk}} 03:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Siberian Turkic dialects

Phonetically, the most ancient forms for garlic plants seem to have been preserved in Siberian Turkic dialects and Mongolian, since they show the typical signs of rhotacism (l > r) and initial consonant mutation (k/h > s/š): Altaian, Teleut kalma, Tuva xylba, Lebedinskij-Tatar, Shor, Khakass kalba (+m/b variation), Mongolian xal-iar. Unfortunatley o page 238 Maria hasen’t left any detailed explanation on this, but worth to be mentioned in the discussion page at least. 12:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)~