Sumerian is Archaic Tamil and Not a Derivative of Turkish

[K. Loganathan]

அன்பர்களே

சுமேரு மொழி தொல்தமிழே என்பது அந்த மொழியின் இலக்கியங்களை படிப்போருக்கு அதுவும் தமிழ் மொழி அறிவு உள்ளோருக்கு தெற்றென புரியும் ஒன்றாகும். ஆயினும் இது தமிழர்களிடையேயும் உலகாளவிய நிலையிலும் இன்னும் புரிந்துகொள்ளப்படா வொன்றாகவே இருக்கின்றது. தமிழ் மொழி அறிஞர்களிடையே வேண்டிய அளவிற்கு ஆர்வமும் இல்லை,

எனினும் எனக்கு சுமேரு மொழி தொல்தமிழே என்று பட அதற்கு மாற்றாக வந்த பலரோடு விவாதங்களின் ஈடுபட்டு விளக்கியும் உள்ளேன். அதுபோல Polat Kaya  எனும் துருக்கிய அரிஞரோடு நடந்த கருத்துப் பரிமாற்றம் அவர் துருக்கிய மொழியின் திரிபே தமிழ் மொழி என அசனை தக்க காரணங்களோடு  மறுத்து எழுதிய கட்டுரையின் ஒரு பகுதி கீழே, முழு கட்டுரை கிழ் வரும் சுட்டிகையில்:

https://sites.google.com/site/sumeriantamil/tamil-sumerian-turkish

உலகன்




Sumerian is Archaic Tamil and Not a Derivative of Turkish



Dr K.Loganathan, 2004



Dear Polat Kaya



Thank-you so much. Now you have also Dr BVK Sastry claiming that Turkish language is derived from Rigkrit , the language of Rig Veda that you can study and comment upon if you so desire. However I just want to respond briefly to your following claim:



>>>>>>>>>>>>

I appreciate your understanding that Turkish, Sumerian, Tamil and

Hungarian are related languages, however Turkish is not a variant of

SumeruTamil as you put it. On the contrary, it would be more correct

to say that Sumerian was a variant of Turkish - as is Tamil.

Sumerian, Tamil and Turkish are Turanian languages, and Turanian

languages are Turkic, that is, the languages of Tur/Turk peoples. If

Sumerian does not appear exactly the same as Turkish, it is because

Sumerian, at worst, was a dialect of Turkish - just like present-day

dialects of Turkish are - as spoken throughout the present Turkish

world. Additionally, the established presentation of Sumerian is very

nebulous. This will become clearer as I go through your comments in

this dialog.



The Sumerian language, as it is known at present, has been read

through a frosted-glass. That "frosted-glass" window is the so-called

"Akkadian" language which is a manufactured language using Sumerian

and/or Turkish words and phrases as the source - as spoken at that

time. Therefore the Sumerian that is presented to us is very much

blurred and Semitized. In other words, the Sumerian language is

presented to us in a distorted form meaning that its presentation is

not truly authentic. When S. N. Kramer wrote about Sumerian, he

described it in relation to Turkish by using "double negatives" as if

he did not know how to express his thoughts in the positive sense.

S. N. Kramer said:



"Sumerian resembles no little such agglutinative languages as

Turkish, Hungarian, and some of the Caucasian languages. In

vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, however, Sumerian still stands

alone and seems to be unrelated to any other language, living or

dead." [1]>



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



Now you are saying that Sumerian is a dialect of Turkish language and considering the geographical proximity of Turkey to ancient Sumeria, this cannot be ruled out. Now you also claim that the linkage of Sumerian with ancient Turkish language is not clear because the readings have been through the Akkadian language (perhaps the interlinear translations of Sumerian lines into Akkadian and various bilingual dictionaries). The readings are ‘nebulous’ because they are semitized etc. I shall provide in this post evidences to show that this may not be so and that despite all the handicaps within which the Sumeriologist worked in their transliterations and translations, they were remarkably accurate.



But before that let me mention that the archaic language from which Sumerian evolved could be many. We can cite the Meroitic of the Nubian, the Harappan language of the Indus so forth. One of the well established historical fact about the Sumerians is that they were not an indigenous group but rather a group of people who came from the East and settled there. This ‘East” could be Harappa or Kumari Nadu, swallowed by the floods and which is mentioned in Sumerian texts themselves in many places. Perhaps there was an ancient and massive Tsunami which uprooted the survivors and landed them in the Sumeria. The account of deluge in Sumerian literature itself can be cited in favor of it. Now if this foreign origin of the Sumerians is true then we can rule out they were Turkish people who were speaking some kind of Turkish dialect and for which there are no independent evidences, as far as I know. This claim can be accepted only if some texts of ancient Turkish are provided and linkage with Sumerian is demonstrated.



The Reading of the Cuneiform Sumerian Texts.



As I have said I do not think that Sumerian is an isolated language, dead and gone after the collapse of Sumerian Civilization on the valleys of Tigris and Euphrates. In this I happily agree with you. The Sumeriologists are certainly wrong in thinking so. I think the Sumerians survive as Dravidians in India, the Turkish in Turkey the Hungarians and so forth. We can also link them with the Japanese Koreans and so forth. All these linguistic groups, in addition to being agglutinative also show impressive lexical correspondences. These facts agree with a kind of dispersal of Sumerians across the globe after the collapse of their great civilization in Ur.



The question now is: What is if the readings of Sumeriologists are surprisingly ACCURATE and that what are required are NOT massive reconstructions but only some cosmetic changes? What is if the Sumerian texts as read are quite intelligible as a form of Archaic Tamil and without distorting too much the readings as available?



Let me provide some evidences in this direction



Let me quote some sentences form Suruppak’s NeRi ( Su. nari) probably the oldest extent literary text in Sumerian where the oldest tablet goes back to the Al Ubaid Period ( c. 2600 BC). Since it was in circulation as oral literature perhaps for centuries, I place the date around 3000 BC)



12.



inim dug-ga-mu na-ab-ta-bal-e-de ( Do not transgress the word I speak)



Ta. enam tuukka muu naa avttu paalyidee ( “)



13.



nari abba nig kal-la-am gu-zu he-em-si-gal ( The instructions of an old man are precious, may you submit to them)



Ta. neRi appaa nika kallaam kuuv ju eeyem sei kaal ( “)



Here the meanings are retained though in some cases I also have given my own interpretations ( not here). However there is remarkable AGREEMENT of these readings and meanings with C.Tamil as given above. We have lexical correspondence like inim ( Ta. en, enam) dug-ga ( Ta. tuukku) bal ( Ta. paal, paar) e-de ( Ta. idu), nari (Ta. naRi) , abba ( Ta. appaa) kal ( Ta. kal) , gal ( Ta. kaal, kaar) and so forth. There are grammatical features that are same as in C.Tamil : kal> kalla where we have ‘-a’s the adjectival formant. We have also in ‘bal-e-de’, the aux. verb ‘idu’ still in use as in poo idu ( go away) in Modern Tamil.



Of course there are some differences and perhaps because the Cuneiform script was imperfect and the transliterations scheme employed still inadequate. The semivowel was not represented and hence even ‘mey’ is written or read as ‘me” (as below). The distinctions between ‘r’ and the trill ‘R’ is not also accommodated as in ‘nari’ which is Ta. neRi



Notice such changes are only MINOR and cosmetic. The most important aspect is that these sentences and hundreds of such sentences are intelligible as a kind of Tamil, an Archaic Tamil quite easily and without major recasting of the phonetic shape of the original. Now considering that the Sumeriologists used Akkadian (and some plain guesswork) and where they DID NOT refer to the Dravidian languages at all, this remarkable Tamil character of the language is indeed surprising. The close correspondence with Tamil gives added support to the remarkable accuracy of the Sumeriologists’reading of the Cuneiform texts



Below I give more such sentences taken form En Hudu Anna’s Exordium (c. 2300 BC)



These facts show that definitely Sumerian is Archaic Tamil and that there is a continuity of evolutionary development of Sumerian to C.Tamil.



Now in the face of this fact, it would turnout that Sumerian, the Archaic Tamil is NOT a dialect of Archaic Turkish, that some ancient branch of Turkish language developed into Archaic Tamil and later as C. Tamil Rigkrit and so forth. And what evidences are there as independent texts to show that this is the case? Are there specimens of Turkish texts dating earlier than 3000 BC or so and where we can show how Sumerian, the Archaic Tamil evolved from it?



I leave it to you to answer this as I am not familiar enough with Turkish language and history to say anything definite. However from the samples I have given, I think whatever the problem, Sumerian is certainly Archaic Tamil



Loga

[K. Loganathan]

Hi

Thank-you. Though I do not subscribe to the Lemurian origins of Tamils but I appreciate your agreement with   me that the Sumerians are ancient Tamils.  I am glad also to note that you have taken the trouble to study the Sumerian texts. This is the need of the day.  As Tamil scholars begin a serious study of Sumerian texts they will see the origins of Tamil language and culture in the proper perspective.

I hope soon there will be a studies in TN.

Loga

On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Kalaivanan Arumugam <akvan...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Ulagan,Thank you for your very remarkable research.You are putting a great affort to find the Origin of Tamilians.And most of the basic discoveries in the world  like Culture, Civilisation ,Farming ,Engineering,laws and etc,etc,are taken from the Tamilians.I do agree with you.When the first time(about 10 - 12 years back) I read about Sumerian Text in the Twealth Planet,i was arguing with my friends that this Sumerian people must be Tamilians.And many of my friends puzzle,they don't know how to counter my argument.Anyway now through you the truth is coming out.

And to make it short,i like to say some word before I leave:-

1)Our Origin Is from Lemuria Continent,that is why Japanese,Korea ,China and South Asian countries all their Languages quite similar to Tamil Language.All of us were living in one huge Continent,and when the Big Flood happened all of us break up and separated and survivors reach to the near by land.That is how most of the schollers reach to the middle east(Sumeria).China knows and have most of the scriptures  about this Big Flood and it's survivors.And they also know that their language is very similar to Tamil but they don't want to give Tamilians a free ride.Same like how they coverup about Buddist Saint Bodhidharma,we Tamilian too need a Japanese to show us that how the Chinese hide this very big truth of the Tamilians.We are sleeping I don't know when are we going to wake up?

2)Our tamil God  lord Muruga created us.His father the man symbol of cresent supported him eventually.what I'm trying to say here is are we the creation of the Aliens?But the Superime God (Anunaki)was not happy with the creation of the tamilians, so he let us live in miserable life,humiliated,never get the regonisation of our discoveries.but On and Off Lord  Murugan were Sure to help us Overcome all the let downs.I see it as Anunaki's plan is something else but this man symbol of cresent and his son spoilt his plans.That is how I interperate when I read the Sumerian text.

[K. Loganathan]

Dear KA

That you resort to Tamils outside India and people like the Japanese for further research into Sumerian shows that you have lost hope on the Tamil scholarship of Tamil scholars in TN.

You are not alone in this, The fact is Tamil culture has become a degenerate culture where Cinema rules the mind of all.  The whole Tamil politics for the last 50 years or so is the Politics of cinema heroes

What has happened in this is Tamil scholarship is almost dead.  I understand that there has not been a single academically excellent paper over the last fifty years or so,

 I am an overseas Tamil, a Malaysian living in Penang Malaysia. Now if I with my limited resources can do so much for Sumerian studies so can the professors in TN universities provided there INTEREST in such studies.

The problem is there is NO  INTEREST and WILL to conduct such studies. There are only a few organizations like THF doing whatever they can to preserve and develop further Tamil studies.

It is really a great shame and I am at a loss on what to do.

At the moment I continue my studies, however limited they are hoping and praying that the Tamil scholars in TN will wake up to the enormous importance of SumeruTamil studies to unravel the ancient History of the Tamil people.

Loga

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Kalaivanan Arumugam <akvan...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thank you Sir,with all the tons of  researches on your shoulders,it's very kind of you taking the effort to reply my Comments..I too hope one day the Tamil  scholers of India were do the research on Sumerian Text.But I doubt the Tamil scholers  of India were do a proper research on the Sumerian Civilisation,Indian Government were never fund them on this issue unless the scholers agrees to distort the evidence of the Tamil Involvement in the Sumerian civilization.Perhaps the Tamil scholers outside India were  do some thing about this issue.And also I strongly believe that the Japanese Scholers were daringly do their research if they happen to know that Sumerian People are actually the desendans of the  Tamilians of  Lemuria.So far only the Japanese have strongly said to the world that their language are influence by Tamil language.

Mr Ulagan can please tell me your nasionality.can we meet in person?