The English translation renders the sound "y" (like in York) with letter "y", but in his Latinized spelling the author may be using "j"to express this sound. Where the English traditional spelling is with "y", the "y" spelling was used in translation. However, the sound transitions shown by the author include j's that were retained in the translation with a strong suspicion that they in fact represent "y" (like in York), and not "j" as in "jealousy", i.g. the author's "d, z, j and r" may have to be read as "d, z, y and r". Except for the author's sound conversion examples, the English translation renders "j" for  the sound "j" like in "Fuji film,  jealousy" (including roots and syllables "aj", "oj", "uj" etc.). Where the author used conventional Cyrillic or quasi-Cyrillic letters, the translation renders them in Latin with English accent: sh for š/ş, ch for č/ç, etc. Otherwise, the plethora of author's  Latinized diacritical marks is retained as much as possible, even though the value of phonetical finesse is unclear when the value of the underlying phonetical reading is an untestable chain of inferences with different probabilities.

Without explicit explanation, the author takes Chagatai (aka Jagatai) in parentheses. Presumably, that is intended to indicate that "Chagatai" is a political, and not a linguistic term, and then linguistically the "Chagatai" is  predominantly Uigur/Karluk language.

Translator's Notes are shown in blue italics. And I have used abbreviation "anct." for "ancient", evidently not a common abbreviation, unlike "antc." for " antique". I felt that to use "antc." for the Sumer-time Türkic would presumptuous and imposing too much on the legacy of 2 millenniums younger ancients of the Ancient Greeks.

"SUMER"-TÜRKIC COINCIDENCES AND GRAPHICAL LOGOGRAMS

The language of city settlements of a southern Messopotamia or Sumer at the boundary 4th-3rd of millenniums BC, the language of creators of logographical script (Wortschrift "script of words") and Babilonian cuneiform is a sacred language that received a name "Sumerian" ¹, belongs to the most ancient documented written languages of the world. Despite numerous attempts to find the genetic group for the Sumerian language, its relationship with any other language is now considered undetermined ². The hypothesis of F.Hommel ³ about a relationship of the Sumerian with the Altai languages (and even with Ural-Altai languages as a whole) was supported by a Soviet historian S.P. Tolstov ⁴, but somehow it manages to remain unproven. Moreover, the random comparisons, made by F.Hommel, buried a "rational grain", like the matching Sumerian dingir "Gott" with the ancient Türkic tangri "Himmel". As a Türkolog, I was attracted by an opportunity to examine anew this hypothesis, mainly, for comparison of the Sumerian and patently Türkic lexicon ⁵. It resulted in additional introduction of more than twenty indisputable lexical coincidences between the Sumerian and Türkic languages that ascend to a proto-Türkic language or a status of the language even before the migration of the "Sumerians"to the Messopotamia (4th millennium BC):

1 DINGIR (diηir, digir) "god" [most ancient graphic sign - symbol "star ~ sky ~ god"],
anct. Türk. täηri "Sky; god, deity",
Khakas tugir "sky",
Altai ten_geri "sky, god",
Yakut (Saka) tan_gara "sky, god",
Kazakh ten_gir, ten_geri "god,  or zen_gir "enormous, high, highest" (the initial *d ~ δ in anlaut⁶ naturally produced d, t and z),
Uigur ten_gri "god",
Chuvash turæ "god, deity",
compare Mongol tæn_gær "sky";

2 DUMU "son; child",
anct. Türk. tun "first" or tun oγul "first-born, first child",
Tuva dun ool "first-born",
Uigur, Altai and Kirgiz tun "first-born",
Kazakh tüηgysh "first; first-born";

3 UD "day; time",
anct. Türk. öd ~ öδ "time",
Tuva To öy "moment, time, season" (j and d > t are reflexes of the initial *d ~ δ in aslaut, typical for the Tuva language; compare anct. Türk. ed ~ eδ "thing, property, riches" > Tuva et "1) property; 2) everyday thing (object); 3) leather tanning) "and Karakalpak iy "1) tanning, leather tawing (dry process treatment); 2) ferment for leather tanning");
278

4 DUG "good (adj.) ",
anct. Türk. ïduq ~ ïδuq "sacred, holy" (another meaning of the word ïδuq is "released, freed, slated for sacrifice", noted by Mahmud Kashgari, allows to observe a verbal derivative < ïδ "1) send; 2) let; 3) carry, spread"),
Tuva ydyk "1) obs. sacred collar (harness around neck of an animal); 2) holy relic; 3) obs. sacred " ⁷,
Khakas yzyh "1) myth. spirits of rivers, mountains, valleys; 2) obs. subject of worship, reverence (for example, mountain, tree, animal); 3) obs. sacred"⁸,
Kirgiz yjyk "1) sacred, fortunate; 2) obs. sacred domesticated animal (joined to herd so not to be slaughtered and not to be used; in some places the horses are excluded from such animals); 3) best of wild even-toed ungulates" ⁹,
Chuvash yræ "1) kind, good, excellent, healthy; 2) kindness, everything kind and good; 3) well, excellent" ¹⁰.
These facts show that d, z, j and r in Türkic languages are partial reflexes of the initial *d ~ δ, as that was already established for a long time in the Türkology ¹¹. Some links of this phonetic law are even observed within one language, compare the Kazakh syiyr "peel, tear off" and sydyr "1) to skin; tear off (bark from a tree) "(anct. Türk. sïδïr "tear off, remove; strip"), ugi [iygi] "kind, useful, good" and izgi ~ езgi "1) kind, beneficial; 2) sacred, holy, pious" (anct. Türk. edgü ~ eδgü ~ ejgü "1) good, kind; 2) well; 3) as a noun benefit, goodness");

5 UTU "sun" (most ancient Sumerian ideogram or, more precisely, graphic logogram ¹² symbolizing this word, closely resembles the image of a solar boat of the Egyptian god Ra ) is a verbal adjective ütü with a restorable meaning of "scorching, burning (sear, heat) "(an initial form in Chuvash is vëtele "1) scorch, singe, burn; 2) indirect rip",
Turkish ütüle meaning "to singe (animal) ", but not the Turkish ütüle "to iron, iron with an iron" < Turkish ütü "iron" < anct. Türk. ütük "coal iron" < anct. Türk. üti "to iron", compare Turkish ütüme "roasted wheat grain") < üt "to scorch, burn" ("Chagatai" üt "to scorch" ¹³,
Chuvash  vët "1) to scorch, singe, burn, fry (slightly); 2) oral to rip, flog",
Bashkir. öt "to scorch, burn, singe; to burn, burnt" > Bashkir. ötek "1) fumes; 2) indirect puny") < *y (compare in Chuvash the intransitive verb ën "get scorched, to burn, smolder" > ënëk "scorched, burnt" - ënëk "dial. dusk" and, its derivative transitive verb ënt "1) to scorch; 2) to rip, beat", compare Kazakh, Karakalpak üyt "to scorch, singe" ¹⁴, in other words, the most ancient verbal root *y in proto-Türkic language had already developed in case formations üt-, ün- and ünt-). The word ütü, probably, is directly connected with the Mongolian üd "midday"; eden "steppe",
compare Kazakh ien [iyen] "boundlessly extensive; flat, level" and eden "floor" (<*еδän),
279
compare Tuva, Kirgiz ææn "deserted, uninhabited; boondocks, unpopulated",
Kazakh en "wide" (< *egan). The phonetical rule *d ~ δ (d, z, j) ~ *g (g ~ soundless) requires a detailed study. The appearance of sound g in similar cases (for example, anct. Türk. kidiz ~ kiδiz "koshma (fleece felt) ", Tuva kidis "felt; koshma", Altai kiyis "koshma; felt" - Uzbek., Uigur kigiz "koshma; felt", Khakas kiis "koshma, felt") K.Menges¹⁵ interprets as "filling of spaces", however the transition δ > zero sound without a link g needs to be proved. A substantial difficulty would be a fact that the ancient Türkic edär ~ eδar "saddle" corresponds not only with the Uigur egær "saddle", Uzbek egar "saddle", Kirgiz æær "saddle" (g > zero sound), but also, most likely, with the Sumerian eger "back; buttocks (or "behind"? - Translator's Note) "(see below);

6 EGIR (eger) "back; buttocks" (graphic logogram  a bottom part of the back, seat/tush)
anct. Türkic edär ~ eδar "saddle",
Tuva æzer "saddle",
Khakas izer "saddle", Turkish eyer "saddle" and egre "saddle blanket (under a saddle) ",
"Chagatai"    egär  "saddle" ¹⁶ > Kirgiz, Altai æær "saddle",
Kazakh, Karakalpak er "saddle" (the semantics of "saddle" has apparently arisenas a result of "association by adjacency" with the initial meaning of "seat");

7 IS "armor-bearer",
anct. Türkic, eş ~ iş ~ es "friend, acquaintance, comrade" (it is represented with the same phonetic variations in modern Türkic languages);

8 Ù "sleep"
anct. Türkic, u "sleep"; Yakut (Sakha) uu "dream";

9 ÙG - ukù "tribe",
anct. Türkic, uq "clan, descendants" (on uq bodun "people of ten clans, ten-tribal people" is the name of Jeti-Su Türks in Orkhon texts) ¹⁷,
compare Mongol ug " 1.1) beginning; emergence; origin; 2) basis, root; 3) essence, kernel; 2. main, initial, basic",

10 BARÀG "shrine",
anct. Türkic barq "1) building, structure; 2) shrine, temple, sacrificial building" ¹⁹;

11 NIG "thing"
anct. Türkic, neη "1) thing, object, activity; some thing; 2) things, property, riches, means of existence; 3) any, anyone; in negating any, anyone";

12 TAG "to touch"
anct. Türkic teg "1) touch, reach, achieve; 2) overtake, hit; 3) to attack",
Tuva deg "to touch, contact, sideswipe", Sagai dialect of Khakass language tig "to touch, contact",
Khakas teη "to touch, contact",
Kirgiz, Altai, Kazakh, Karakalpak tiy "1) sideswipe, contact, touch; 2) endure, suffer; 3) attack" (phonetic rule g ~ η ~ j). This verb, as found V.M.Illich-Svitych²⁰, has coincidences in Dravidian and ancient Indo-European languages, transcending the framework of Sumer-Türkic (Altaic) coincidences;

13 KUG "pure",
anct. Türk. Quγseηūn (proper name) ²¹,
Kirgiz, Altai kuu "white; pale, pale yellow (dry, singed) ",
Karakalpak, Kazakh kuū "1) white; gray-haired; pale (e.g. face); yellow (e.g. grass); 2) dry, dried up" (quγ > quw > quu);
280

14 SUG "bog, swamp, slough (water)/bayou",
anct. Türk. suγ ~ sub ~ suw " l) water; 2) river",
Khakas, Tuva sug "water",
Karakalpak, Kazakh suū "water",
Kirgiz, Altai suu "water",
Uigur su "water",
Chuvash shyv (shu) "water, river" (suγ > suw > suu, and the Chuvash variation reflects the ancient relantionship S ~ Ś);

15 SAG (saη, sag) "head; leader" (graphic logogram of a human head),
anct. Türk. saγun "elder title in Karluk" or ata saγun "title of Türkic medicine men" ²², where to the root saγ added a Mongolian nominal formant -un;
Kirgiz saη "(in epos) ruler, khan",
Kazakh saηdak, (saηlak) "selected, chosen, better". The term saγ ~ saη " head, head (leader) "ascends, probably, to the Altai community: it also lays in the root of the Evenk words sagdagu "1) elder; 2) bailiff; elder", sagdaku "old (animal) "and sagdan "to grow old" ²³;

16 IL "to hook; to lock (?), (graphic logogram a left leg is snared by right leg),
anct. Türk. il "1) to cling, hook, hook up; 2) to catch",
Khakas, Kazakh il "1) to hook, fasten; 2) to suspend, hang",
Uigur  il  "1) to be hooking, to have hooked; 2) to hang; 3) to close with hook (door) ",
"Chagatai" il "to lock" ²⁴;

17 GUD "bull" (graphic logogram is a symbolical image of head of a bull or bullock),
anct. Türk. ud ~ uδ "cow (in twelve-year animal calendar cycle), bull",
Uigur uy "bullock, bull",
Kirgiz uy "cow, bullock",
Altai uy "cow (in twelve-year animal cycle) ",
Saryg-Ügur uj "bull (in twelve-year cycle) ^"25
the last example displays a little-known reflex ž (i.e. j as in jealousy - Translator's Note) of the initial *d ~ δ in aslaut;

18 GIG "illness",
anct. Türk. ig "illness";

19 GAG "tip" (a primary graphic logogram , a wedged peg or a triangle, transformed in the Babylonian cuneiform script to an ideogram or a semantic logogram, i.e. to a sign for associating concepts),
anct. Türk. gγ ~ aγ "1) place between hips at the bottom of a belly, groin; 2) gap between fingers" ²⁶,
Uigur ag "wedge (in trousers) ",
Kazakh au "wedge in sharovars (bell-bottom trousers) ",
Karakalpak agaü "shuttle (in a manual loom) ". The examples show that the initial *g ~ γ (g) in anlaut, as a rule, turned in Türkic languages to a zero sound, however in cases of "vocalization" it is preserved (γaγ > âγ ~ aγ > aw or *аγаγ > aγaw);
281

20 GIS (ηiš, giš) "tree",
anct. Türk. ïγač "tree",
Türkmen agach,
Kazakh agash,
Tuva yiyash (ïyayš < iγyaš ~ ıηaš) ²⁷, Khakas agas,
Sagai dialect of Khakass language agys, (as a result of diphthongization process)
Chuvash yiyvaç,
Uigur yagach,
Kirgiz jygach,
all with identical meaning "tree".
From the analysis of these correlations is possible to infer a proto-Türkic character of the phonetic rules  ï ~ a, *g ~ γ (g) ~ η (later developed reflexes j, w and v), and s - š ~ č. It is perfectly clear that the sound j (i.e. "y" like in York  - Translator's Note) in the Tuvian variation is not initial, contrary to suggestion by A.G.Biishev ²⁸;

21 SAL "vulva; woman" (graphic logogram , in Hittite cuneiform writing respectively is ideogram ŚAL)
Chuvash shal "internal, interior",
Tuva shala "to sew a belt to top of skirt (slacks, trousers) "< šal (?),
Altai salaa "1) tributary (river); branching (tree, road); 2) slot between fingers; membrane between fingers",
Kirgiz salaa "1) hollow, indentation; 2) slot between fingers; 3) finger" < sal + γa,
compare Evenk sālga "1) groin; 2) step, distance" ²⁹;

22 ERİN (erén) "army"
anct. Türkic, erän "husband, man, soldier";

23 ER ~ IR (ér) "membrum virile; man" (graphic logogram)
anct. Türk, er "1) man; 2) husband, spouse; 3) husband, soldier, hero",
Tuva ær "1) man; 2) male",
Altai ær "1) husband; man; 2) hero, brave",
Khakas ir "1) man; 2) husband",
Chuvash ar "man; husband",
compare Mongol er "1) husband; man; 2) male";

24 SILÂ "lamb" (graphic logogram  horn of a ram - is rightly classed by A.A.Vaiman ³⁰ as a prototype for an early cuneiform sign from archaic Ur)
Khakas sileke "castrated baran (ram)",
in Kyzyl dialect of Khakass language sile is "devil",
Tuva shilege " baran (ram)(in its second year)", etc.

The above "Sumer"-Türkic matches, as we tried to demonstrate, form a certain system, explainable from the positions of historical phonetics of the Türkic languages. The cardinal phonetical laws of the Türkic languages, because of these matches, display an extremely complex development panorama from proto-Türkic language or a language condition (Sumerian written monuments from the boundary of the 4th-3rd millenniums BC, excluding the monuments of the dead Sumerian language, a sacred language of  Babilonian and Assyrian Semites down to present), via the ancient Türkic dialects, to the modern Türkic languages.

The systematic character of the most ancient Sumerian coincidences allows to posit that a part of proto-Türks of the Central Asia migrated to Mesopotamia ³¹, settled there, and materially affected the language and accordingly the graphic logograms of proto-Sumerian written monuments.
282

* * *

These observations, reported in the presentation at the 12th session of the International Alataistic conference in Berlin, were first published in 1974³². A prominent Sumerolog A.A.Vaiman ((Russian) State Hermitage Oriental Department) appraised this material in 1970, and recommended to publish it abroad as an article, but however had friendly counseled me against including the Sumerian-Türkic coincidences in my monograph for a Doctor of Science degree. In the same 1970 I had imprudently shared my insights with a writer and a history fan Oljas Suleimenov. Later he published his sensational book "Asia"(As-i-Ya) (Alma-Ata, 1975), where he declared bravely: "When for the Sumer they beat you in the liver, you stand for it as for your own Motherland. And you take responsibility as for your own Motherland" (p. 199). However, pretty soon he had to publish in the (Communist) Party press a public repentance.

The subjects that were forbidden in the Soviet Türkology in the meantime were successfully explored abroad. In the 1997 an outstanding Türkologist O.N.Tuna published in Ankara his scientific research titled "Sümer ve Türk dillerinin târihî ilgisi ile Türk dili'nin yaşi meselesi" ("Historical connection of Sumerian and Türkic languages and a problem of the Türkic language age"). We had a chance to meet and exchange opinions at the Türkological conferences in Almaty (1990) and Ankara (1993) with the author of that work, a recognized historian of the language, about this problem. The new facts evidenced positively that our interest in the Sumerian material has been natural and scientifically justified.

As a result of long-term research performed by the Türkish colleague (partly in the leading universities of the USA), were revealed 16 phonetical matches between the Sumerian and ancient Türkic languages, with confirming exhibits for 165 Sumerian words. The phonetical correlations, such as initial g- ~ zero sound, d ~ d > j in the middle and at the end of the word, g ~ γ ~ η in the middle and the end the words noted previously by us, received additional confirmation and explanation from him.

For example,
gi "reed" ³³, anct. Türk. ï  "plant; thickets",
gaz "to press, rumple", anct. Türkic ez "to press, rumple",
gur ~ ur "to harvest, reap", anct. Türk. or "to harvest, mow",
gid "to remove, eliminate", anct. Türk. ïd "to send off",
gišig "door", anct. Türk. ešik "door",
gid "bad; smelly, fetid", anct. Türk. ïd ~ jid (i.e. ïd ~ yid) "odor",
udi "to sleep", anct. Türk. udï- ~ uδï- > uju- (i.e. uyu) "to sleep",
sig "excellent, good", anct. Türk. -jeg "good",
zag "right side", anct. Türk. saγ "right party,
agar "lead (metal)", anct. Türk.  aγır "heavy, weighty",
bulug "border, limit, ridge", anct. Türk. buluη "corner; country of the world",
sig "wool", anct. Türk.  jüη (i.e. yüη) "wool".

Between the compared languages were uncovered anew the phonetic correlations indisputable in our opinion:
initial s- ~ j- (i.e. y-) (sar "to write", anct. Türk.  jaz (i.e. yaz) "to write", sig "excellent, good", anct. Türk. jeg (i.e. yeg) "good", sulu "road, way", anct. Türk.  jol  (i.e. yol) "road, way"),
initial n- ~ j- (na ~ nad "to lay", anct. Türk.   jat  (i.e. yat) "to lay, lie down", nigin "sum", anct. Türk.   jïγin "heap, pile");
283
initial d- ~ j- (dar "to cleave, split; dissect; tear", anct. Türk.  jar (i.e. yar) "to dissect, split", dip "tape, string", anct. Türk.  jip "string, band; cord"),

initial s- (š-) ~ č (sag "to beat, strike", anct. Türk.  čaq "to strike (spark, flame)", šab "to cut, fleece; shear", anct. Türk. čap "to hack; beat, whip, flog", šulpae "deity Šulpae", anct. Türk.  çolpan "morning star, planet Venus"),

š ~ s (šid "number, amount", anct. Türk.  san "number, amount", eš "to blow", anct. Türk.  es "to blow"),

š ~ l (uš "base, foundation", anct. Türk.  ul "base, foundation", uš₂ "dead; to die", anct. Türk.  öl "to die", aša(g) "field, large space", anct. Türk.  alaη "flat, plain (land)", (this Türco-Sumerian appellation, two millenniums older than the Chinese "Yantsai" = "Open Space" = "Alan_g" = "Alan" , is profoundly missing from the work of Agusti Alemany, "Sources On The Alans. Critical Compilation", 2000. Just too bad - Translator's Note).

r ~ z (gur "to break, burst", anct. Türk.  üz "to tear, tear off; break off; break", sur "to squeeze out", anct. Türk.  süz "to rectify, filter", har "to excavate, dig", anct. Türk.  qaz "to dig, excavate; dig out"), (see Ogur and Oguz and r ~ z transition)

Initial d- ~ t- (dur "seat, place", anct. Türk.  tör "place opposite from entrance, honor place", dug "to spill", anct. Türk.  tök "to pour, spill; strew", di "to speak, talk", anct. Türk.  te "to speak, say", dingir "god", anct. Türk.  teηri ~ täηri "Sky, God, Deity", dag "dawn, dawning", anct. Türk.  taη "dawn, dawning"),

initial z- ~ s- (zag "right side", anct. Türk.  saγ "right side", zae "you (pl.)", anct. Türk.   sen "you (sing./familiar)"),

initial z- ~ č- (zibin "insect", anct. Türk.  čïbïn ~ čibin "fly; mosquito"),

b ~ m (tibira "metal", anct. Türk.  temir "iron"), (also see b ~ m transition at Etruscans and Türkic languages)

final -n ~ zero sound (mae ~ men "I", anct. Türk. ben ~ men "I", i "ten", anct. Türk.  on "ten").

Late O.N.Tuna came to extremely important conclusions (sited below in our translation):

"1. Sumerian and Türkic languages in a very remote time could be related or unrelated, here this question does not interest us. However, on the basis of the mass of 165 words and accompanying explanations is proved the case that in a linguistical aspect between Sumerians and Türks transpires a historical connection.

2. It is established that at least in 3500 BC the Türks are found in the eastern part of Turkey. What were the northern, eastern and western borders of this territory I am going to address in a separate research.

3. Is proved the existence of the Türkic language as an independent language with two branches 5500 years before present. If the decay rate is constant from the birth to the contact with the Sumerians, the base of the proto-Türkic or Türkic language conceivably existed a long period before. This conclusion can be compared with my statement that "its age, by minimal calculations, is 8,500 years", formulated in the process of my research in Türkic language, archeology and glottochronology in my work "Theory of Altai languages" ("Altai Dilleri Teorisi", pp. 52-55), completed at the end of the 1978 and published in August  1983. Presently, this figure is being corroborated. For if to accept in the calculations the previous period from the basic Türkic languages to its major branching into Eastern Türkic and Western Türkic, which had past since that period to our time, the 5,500 years can be doubled.
284

4. Today, among the alive languages of the world, the Türkic language possesses the most ancient written evidence. These are the loan words in the Sumerian cuneiform tablets.

5. One of the major problems in the theory of the Altai languages, the anachronism in examples related to l₂ ~ š, r₂ ~ z, requires corrections on this question in the opposite direction" ³⁴.

 

1 Falkenstein A. Das Sumerische. - Handbuch der Orientalistik. Abt. I, Bd. II, Absch. 1-2, Geschichte der Forschung, Sprache und Literatür, Leiden 1959, S. 9, 11, 14-15 (šumeru is a distorted Akkadian rendition of own "Sumerian" name Kenger or Keηer (i.e. Ken_ger)).

2 Diakonov I.M. Languages of ancient Near East, "Questions of linguistics", 1954, No 5, pp. 47, 51; Diakonov I.M. Languages of ancient Near East. Moscow, 1967, pp. 21, 83-84.

3 Ноmmel F. Ethnologic und Geographie des alten Orients. Münctıen, 1926, pp. 19, 21-22.

4 Tolstov S.P. Ancient Chorasm. Attempt of historical-archeological research. М., 1948. pp. 76.
5 We examined the Sumerian words, which phonetic shape and meaning are apparently sufficiently established, from listed above research by A.Falkenshtein and I.M.Diakonov, and partially from other sources (Deimel P.A. Gössmann P. Sumerisches Lexikon I. Rom, 1947; Driver G. R. Semitic Writing from Pictograph to Alphabet. London, 1948; Ivanov V.V. Hettite language, Moscow 1963). We examined the Türkic words from the Ancient Türkic written monuments (which are firmly dated since the 8th century AD, though some undated texts definitely gravitate to earlier time), and modern Türkic-speaking dictionaries, see: Malov S. E. Monuments of Ancient Türkic writing, M.-L., 1951; Ancient Türkic dictionary. L., 1969, etc.

6 Compare Illich-Svitych V.M. Altaic dentals: t, d, δ. Questions of linguistics", 1963, No 6, pp. 44.

7 Sat Sh. Ch. Tuvan-Russian dictionary, М., 1955., pp. 563.

8 Baskakov N.A., Inkijekova-Grekul. Khakass-Russian dictionary. М., 1953., pp. 330.

9 Üdakhin K.K. Kirgiz-Russian dictionary. M., 1940. pp. 925.

10 Egorov V.G. Chuvash-Russian dictionary. Cheboksary, 1954, pp. 288.

11 Dmitriev N.K. Correlation of r/d/t/z/z/y. Coll. "Research in comparative grammar of Türkic languages, Part I, Phon, pp. 326-328; Menges K. H. The Türkic languages and peoples. (An introduction to Türkic Studies). Wiesbaden, 1968, pp. 87-89.

12 Relatively best, in our opinion, justified modern terminology of the scripts see: Istrin V.A. Emergence and development of writing. М., 1965, pp. 36,39, 132.

13 Radlov V.V. Attempt of dictionary of Türkic adverbs, vol. I, SPb., 1893, pp. 1863.
285

14 Apparently, here was reflected a phonetic law n ~ j (i.e. y). Note, that A.Gaben advocated as a main criteria for classification of the Ancient Türkic Dialects the distinction of sounds n, ñ and j (i.e. y) in inlaut and aslaut of some roots, for example: añïγ, anïγ and  ajïγ  "bad, malicious; very much" jañ- and  jaj- "to disperse, scatter; win" (Gabain A. von. Alttürkische Grammatik, Leipzig, 1950, SS. 3-8, 53).

15 Menges K.N. Ibid, p. 90.

16 Borovkov A.K. "Bada'i al-lugat". Dictionary of Tali ' Imani Geratian to Alisher Navoi's compositions. М., 1961, pp. 117.

17 Equating the words uq "clan, tribe " and oq "arrow" in the Ancient Türkic language of Orkhon-Yenisean texts is apparently  counter-indicated, compare
Tuva uk "clan, breed, origin" and ok [o'k] "bullet; arrow; missile",
Altai uk "clan, breed, tribe, generation, posterity" and ok "bullet, arrow, missile" (N.A.Baskakov-T. M.Toschakova, Ojrot-Russian dictionary, М., 1947, pp. 166, 115).

18 Rinchine A.R. Brief Mongol-Russian dictionary. М., 1947, pp. 228.

19 Compare Malov S. E. Monuments of Ancient Türkic writing. M.-L., 1951, pp. 28, 33, 35, 43, 368; Gumilev L.N. Ancient Türks. М., 1967, pp. 329-330.

20 Illich-Svitych V.M. Correlation of slotted in nostratiche languages. Coll. "Ethymology. 1966", М., 1968, pp. 331.

21 Malov S.E. Monuments of Ancient Türkic writing in Mongolia and Kirgizia. M.-L, 1959, pp. 14, 18, 23, 98.

22 Mahmud Kashgari. Divan lugat-at-turk, I. Translation (in Uzbek language) and preparation for printing by S.M.Mutallibov, Tashkent, 1960, pp. 382.

23 Romanova A.V., Myreeva A.N. Dialectological dictionary of Evenki language. L., 1968, pp. 134.

24 Radlov V.V. Ibid., pp. 1473.

25 Malov S.E. Language of Yellow Uigurs. Alma-Ata, 1957, pp. 129.

26 Mahmud Kashgari. Ibid., pp. 109. The double spelling of this word " ãγ and аγ unambiguously points to the "primary" (i.e. till now not explained) length in the anlaut.

27 Compare anct. Türk, mügüz ~ müηüz ~ miηiz ~ müjüz (i.e. müyüz) "horn (animal)"and Tuva myiys "horn" [j (y) <*g ~ γ (g) ~ η].

28 Biishev A.G. "Primary" long vowels in Türkic languages. Ufa 1968, pp. 68.

29 Romanova A.V., Myreeva A.N. Ibid., pp. 134.

30 Vaiman A. A. Decoding of proto-Sumerian writing (preliminary release). "Near Eastern Collection, II. Decoding and interpretation of the ancient East writings", М. 1966, pp. 12-13.

31 Compare Klima Y. Society and culture of an ancient Mesopotamia. Prague, 1967, pp. 27: "Beginning of Sumerian penetration into southern Mesopotamia can be attributed to the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC".

32 Amanjolov A. S. "Sumero"-Türkic coincidences and graphic logograms. - "Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur der Altaischen Völker", Protokollband der XII. Tagung der Permanent International Altaistic Conference 1969 in Berlin. Herausgegeben von G. Hazai und P. Zieme. Berlin, 1974, c. 65-71.

33 Hereinafter the German and English translations of the Sumerian words we replaced with Russian translations (and respectively, in this posting the Russian translations are reverse translated into English, possibly somewhat shifting the semantic - Translator's Note).

34 Tuna О. N. Sümer ve Türk dillerinin târihî ilgisi ile Türk dili'nin yaşi meselesi, Ankara, 1997, p. 49.
286